Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing (epiphany) of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;  Titus 2:13







AS INTRODUCTORY to the study of this chapter's subject a brief consideration of Gen. 33: 17–35: 29 will be helpful. Elsewhere it has been shown that Gen. 31 treats of the separation of the Lord's real people from His nominal people from 1846 to 1916; vs. 1-16 type the acts that produced the separation; vs. 17-21 type the separation itself; vs. 22-24 type the reaction of the nominal people of God thereto and God's warning them as to their pertinent course; vs. 25-32 type the debate of the leaders of God's two peoples thereover; vs. 33-35 type the nominal people of God searching the teachings and arrangements of God's real people in an effort to find their creed idols with the latter; vs. 36-42 type the leaders of God's real people rebuking the leaders of God's nominal people for the latters' Gospel-Age oppression of the former; vs. 43-54 type the agreement between the two sets of leaders to keep each one to his peculiar sphere of activity in their separation; and v. 55 types the final act of separation in more or less good will. In Chapter II a brief exposition of Gen. 32: 1–33: 16 is given; and with these brief remarks we are ready to take up a brief study of Gen. 33: 17–35: 29 as an introduction to the proper subject-matter of this chapter, remarking that in this section is typed a brief summary of certain main Parousia and Epiphany matters.


The formation and chief work of the Zion's Watch Tower Tract Society in 1881 to 1884, before it was incorporated (Dec. 13, 1884), are given in v. 17; for in those years the five leading brethren occupied themselves in a temporary form (Succoth, tents) of expediting the work for the Lord's Truth people toward the brethren in



the nominal church. But in 1884 the leading brethren in peace (mistranslated in the A.V. as a proper noun, Shalem; see the A.R.V.) entered into the discussion of incorporating the Zion's Watch Tower Tract Society (Shechem, shoulder, accord, v. 18; in 1896 there were added to the name, after the word Tower, the words "Bible and"), in the sphere of the Truth and its Spirit, after leaving the sphere of the nominal church's creeds and their spirit, and with all the Truth people they took their position in relation to the discussion of such incorporation. The leading brethren paid the price of sacrificing some of their human all for the advantages to be gained from incorporating (the children of Hamor [ass, here representing the charter, which fathered the board of directors]); for unincorporated they feared certain dangers to the work in case of Bro. Russell's death. In connection with this corporation, which during Bro. Russell's life was only a name behind which he hid himself, the Church as God's altar was gathered together and was called, the mighty one of God's people (v. 20). Thus is briefly treated the Society as a corporation during the Parousia. Its real vitalizing occurred at the time of Bro. Russell's death, i.e., in the Epiphany, even as he had all along purposed; for then the Society as shareholders, directors and officers stepped upon the stage of activity, and developed into a sectarian movement, partly a Truth movement and partly a nominal-church movement and took its stand as such among both (Dinah, judgment, 34: 1). The directors, developed by the charter, the Society's rulers in the spheres of the Truth people's relations to these two movements, defiled the Society as shareholders, directors and officers: (1) by giving the shareholders the liberty of passing J.F.R.'s resolutions, intended to be by-laws; (2) by converting those resolutions into Society by-laws, and (3) by acquiescing three months in J.F.R.'s usurpation over the Society (v. 2).


These directors, especially their majority, thereafter greatly longed to be the head of the Society in its shareJoseph—



holders and officers and in its business and affairs, seeking to win them thereto (v. 3). They enlisted the charter's provisions as favoring their pertinent desires and as gaining them for themselves (v. 4). The Little Flock leaders in J. had learned that the directors had done these three defiling acts to the Society as share holders, directors and officers, before the prospective Great Company groups, busy with their shepherdizing the Lord's people, were aware of it; and for a while these Little Flock leaders in J. kept silence thereover (v. 5). The charter in the persons of the board's majority and their supporters sought J.'s consent to the former's suit (v. 6). From the resultant discussion the prospective Great Company groups learned of the pertinent evils of the directors, and were from various standpoints grieved and greatly enraged thereover, since this was a great wrong and folly done among God's people (v. 7). The charter in its supporters sought to bring to the directors the headship of the Society in its officers and shareholders (v. 8), as it proposed other cooperative connections (v. 9), whereby it was thought their mutual interests would be prospered (v. 10). To the pleas of the charter in its supporters, the board's majority, which representatively as such was the board, added their pleas, promising to render any service required to gain headship in the Society (vs. 11, 12). This came to a head in the directors' meeting of June 20, 1917, when the resolution was presented to rescind the by-laws that J.F.R. was using to usurp controllership over the Society and its business and affairs, as well as over the board. Deceitfully in J.F.R., W.E.V. and A.H.M., because of the pertinent evils done antitypical Dinah (v. 13), put off the directors as requiring something illegal and dishonorable for them on corporational matters, since the shareholders had voted these as valid by-laws (v. 14), but agreed to reciprocate in matters of mutual relations, if, like them, they would submit to pertinent corporational law (vs. 15, 16), threatening that if they would not agree thereto, they would take all society



matters out of their power (v. 17), and promising that they would furnish legal proof that the shareholders' resolutions were binding on the board.


The four directors and the charter in its supporters, satisfied with this line of thought (v. 18), agreed to abide by the law on the subject, if J.F.R., etc., could furnish legal proof on their claim, because they honorably desired to be conformable to the law, and thus get their rights in harmony therewith in the Society (v. 19). The directors and the charter in its supporters conferred with their like-minded brethren (v. 20), assuring them of the peaceable character of J.F.R., etc., and proposing mutual cooperation on all sides (v. 21), on condition that they agree to abide by the pertinent corporational law, like the others (v. 22), alleging that they would greatly profit from this course (v. 23). To this all the prominent ones consented, signifying and enacting their willingness to submit legally in the matter (v. 24). But when these were distressed by their agreed submission to the alleged pertinent law, treacherously the prospective Mahlite and Mushite Levites, July 17, 1917, presented an opinion of a lawyer who later in effect acknowledged that it was a bought and untrue opinion, to the effect that the four directors were not legal directors, alleging that the law required directors to be annually elected, an opinion that, if true, would have voided the directorship of the other three and voided the standing of the three officers of the board (vs. 25-27); and these Mahlite and Mushite Levites used that opinion as though it were a judge's decision, and thus illegally for that opinion ousted the four directors, cutting them and their supporters off from the Society, practically made the charter nonexistent and took the Society in its directors, officers and shareholders out of the possession of the genuine directors and went their way, making plunder of every pertinent person and thing (vs. 28, 29). Later it was learned that the law's requirement affected only directors of corporations to be formed after its enactment, and did not apply to corporations formed before its enactment,



if their charters required their directors to hold office longer than a year. In other words, the law was not retroactive. The Little Flock leaders in J. protested against the course of these Mahlite and Mushite Levites as grieving them and making them unpopular to outsiders, especially in the civil powers, and of endangering them, few in number, to the many outsiders, unto cutting off from place and privilege (v. 30). These excused their deed on the basis that the directors had defiled the Society (v. 31).


God having in 33: 18–34: 31 typed the Society, the first phase exclusively Parousiac, the second Parousiac and Epiphaniac, in its main features in its two phases, the antitype of chapter 35 goes back to the Church as such apart from corporational matters and treats of it, first in certain Parousia features, then in certain Epiphany features. God charged the Little Flock leaders, especially their chief, Bro. Russell, to occupy themselves with Church matters, erecting the true Church as God's Altar in conformity with the model erected in the Jewish Harvest, when the Apostles and their supporters, fleeing from Fleshly Israel, were favored with the Lord's revealing to them His plan (35: 1). Thereupon Bro. Russell and his special helpers, five successive brethren, as previously pointed out, exhorted all Truth people to put away the idols of error, sin, selfishness and worldliness in all their various forms and to purify their graces from pertinent faults (v. 2), and in this condition to betake themselves to the sphere of the Church as to Biblical Truth and its Spirit, and there erect the true Church as the Altar of that God who revealed Himself in His plan to the Apostles and their special helpers amid their distress and the course that they took (v. 3). This exhortation led to the reformation suggested; and all yielded up their symbolic idols and their speculations to Bro. Russell and his five successive special helpers; and these buried them in oblivion in connection with the ministry of Bro. Russell and his successive special helpers, near Society conditions (v. 4). They made the mental journey to primitive Church



conditions, the nominal people of God, by God's providence, fearing them and not opposing them successfully (v. 5). Thus Bro. Russell, his five successive special helpers and all the rest of the Truth people passed over the misdevelopments of the Interim and reached Apostolic conditions in the sphere of the Truth and its Spirit (v. 6). In that condition Bro. Russell and his five successive special helpers erected the Church as God's Altar and called the condition, the mighty one of the house of God, since it was in that condition that God revealed Himself to the Apostles and their special helpers when they fled from persecuting Fleshly Israel (v. 7). It was in this condition that servants (Deborah, bee) of the elective truths pertinent to Fleshly and Spiritual Israel finished their course, and were kept in loving remembrance in connection with Bro. Russell and his five successive special helpers near the true Church's conditions, the Lord's people sorrowing over their loss of these (Allon, oak; bachuth, of weeping).


During the Parousia God by the Truth manifested Himself to Bro. Russell and his special helpers, as He had done before to the Apostles and their special helpers (v. 9). Whereas during the Jewish Harvest God made the Apostles and their special helpers in particular the supplanters (Jacob, supplanter) of the Jewish clergy, during the Parousia God made Bro. Russell and his special helpers the warriors, or princes, of God against the nominal-church clergy (v. 10). During the Parousia God in His power gave them much fruitfulness, even unto their developing the holy nation, the Little Flock, and those who later would be developed into the Great Company groups, yea, even developing such as would become Millennial kings (v. 11). The sphere of Truth and its Spirit that God in His attribute of power gave to God in His attribute of love (Abraham) and to Jesus Christ in His attribute of love (Isaac), God in the Parousia pledged Bro. Russell and that special helper of his who would remain faithful and to all whom they would



develop unto faithfulness (v. 12). This ended that phase of the Divine revelation of Truth to Bro. Russell and his special helpers (v. 13). In view of this revelation Bro. Russell and his special helpers set forth the Parousia Truth, presenting it in its simpler phases (drink offering) and in its harder phases (oil) in understandable ways. And this condition was called the Church by Bro. Russell and his special helpers. Thus briefly in vs. 1-15 we are given a typical description of the development of the Parousia Truth.


Epiphany conditions are described in vs. 16-29. During post-Parousia times the elective truths that developed the two spiritual classes of the Gospel Age—the Little Flock and the Great Company—reached the completion of their work, which is typed by Rachel's death, she typing these two sets of Gospel-Age elective truths and their appliers. The production of the Great Company as a class is an Epiphany work; for by the time the Epiphany ends in its lapping, 1956, all Great Company members will have been brought into the Truth; this completion of that class and their later development in grace, knowledge, service and trial will be some little time (how long we do not know) before the earthly phase of the Kingdom is established. The secondary elective truths and the servants who apply them to the Great Company have very hard labor in bringing this class forth (v. 16). Amid this hard labor J. tells the personal part of these Gospel-Age promises to take comfort amid their hard labor from the thought that they are developing another elect class, the Great Company (v. 17). (In v. 18 the word rendered soul should have been given as life.) In the death throes of the Great Company promises in their appliers they consider and will consider this class as one that gave them overmuch pain (Ben-oni, son of my pain), but J. counts them the class of his chief favor (Benjamin, son of the right hand, v. 18). These promises and their appliers, beginning in their second phase, Oct., 1954, to come to an end, will cease entirely to operate some time after 1956, when they shall have fully prepared



the Great Company unto fitness for their spirit existence and work but before the earthly phase of the Kingdom that will feed all with the bread of life is reached (Ephrath, fruitful; Bethlehem, house of bread), and will be held in respectful memory from Oct., 1954 onward (v. 19). In his exposition of Revelation J. will erect a literary memorial to the Gospel-Age's two elective sets of Truths and their appliers to their respective classes, a literary memorial that will be preserved into the Ages to come (v. 20). It is to be remembered that in the personal parts of antitypical Rachel the appliers of the promises of the Parousia Little Flock movement and of the Epiphany Great Company movement have been finishing their course, some during the Parousia, some during the Epiphany, and some (Great Company appliers of pertinent truths) after 1956 up to the end of this class's stay on earth. Hence the antitypical memorial could be erected before the last of them leaves the earth.


Another phase of the Epiphany is brought out in vs. 21, 22. J. led the Lord's peoples to the Epiphany elective Truth as the strength of God's flock (Edar, flock) and even beyond it to truths relating to Israel and the world. This began in the way of a foregleam, June 27, 1914, when J. pointed out to Bro. Russell that the evening of the penny parable would come Oct., 1914, and that during it the Great Company would murmur and be separated from the Little Flock; and it began as an actual Epiphany work the night of Nov. 9 (God's time, the 10th), 1916, when he told the executive committee, on the basis of Ps. 91: 5, 6, and Ezek. 9: 2, 5-10 (the sixth slaughter man), that a world-wide, the sixth, harvest sifting was about to break out, beginning in Europe, and that this would continue in ever-increasing measure (v. 21). It was during this time that the Gershonite Levites (Reuben, behold a son) defiled certain of the Lord's truths and arrangements, particularly those that are nearest the Little Flock truths and arrangements. Among such truths are those on the Sin-offering, the chronology,



Daniel and Revelation; and among such arrangements are those on headquarters, corporations and charters. This was a great grief to J. (v. 22). Vs. 23-26 treat of the Epiphany Levite groups and of J. They will be merely enumerated here and details on them will come in the exposition of Gen. 49. Reuben types the Gershonites, the first class of the Epiphany Levites to be manifested; the Merarites are not typed by a single son, but their two groups, Mahlites and Mushites, are respectively typed by Simeon and Levi; the Kohathites are typed by Judah; the Libnite Gershonites are typed by Issachar, and the Shimite Gershonites by Zebulon. These are the groups developed by the less refined Epiphany truths and their appliers (Leah, v. 23). J. is typed by Joseph, and the good crown-losing Levites are typed by Benjamin. These are developed by the higher Epiphany truths and their appliers (Rachel, v. 24). The Sturgeonites are typed by Dan, and the Hirshites by Naphtali. These were developed by truths and their appliers more nearly related to those typed by Rachel (Bilhah, v. 25). The Ritchieites are typed by Gad, and the Olsonites by Asher. These were developed by truths and their appliers (Zilpah) better than those typed by Leah, but not so good as those typed by Bilhah (v. 26).


A final Epiphany feature is typed in vs. 27-29. In their mutual relations Jacob and Esau have double applications: for Esau types (1) Fleshly Israel rejected from the spiritual election (Rom. 9: 10-13) and (2) the Great Company rejected from the chief spiritual election (Heb. 12: 16, 17); and Jacob types (1) Spiritual Israel accepted into the spiritual election (Rom. 9: 10-13) and (2) the star-members and their special helpers. From the standpoint of the first set of types blind Isaac types God in His impartiality as to which class the Lord would make the Gospel-Age elect, though giving Fleshly Israel the first chance thereat; and Rebekah types the spiritual promises and their appliers as favoring Spiritual Israel. From this viewpoint first we will interpret vs. 27-29: Spiritual Israel in both elect classes



in the Epiphany in mind journey to the strong (Mamre, strength) friendship (Hebron, friendship) of God in His elective impartiality (v. 27); and they come there, in the Little Flock before, and in the Great Company shortly after the last one of the Great Company class in 1956 gets the Truth, and find that God has come to an end of His Gospel-Age spiritual elective work after He has exercised it throughout the Gospel Age and in its three Miniatures; and they will hold Him in loving appreciation therefore; while later, Fleshly Israel, after their conversion, which will come after 1956, will come to see their real place in God's earthly election, and will hold Him in loving appreciation (vs. 28, 29) As to the second set of antitypes: Bro. Russell made and J. will make a mental journey in the strong friendship of God in His elective impartiality (v. 27), and will find that God will come to an end of His elective work as to the Little Flock in J., its last member to leave the earth; after he has fully seen God's elective work as to the star-members, he will revere God heartily therefore (vs. 28, 29).


Since Gen. 36 treats of Fleshly Israel in details not germane to this chapter on Joseph, Type and Smallest Antitype, we will leave its exposition for some future time and occasion. Having ended the exposition of the sections that are introductory to the study of the smallest Joseph, we are now prepared to take up the matters that are germane to the subject of this chapter. From Gen. 37 to the end of the book, with certain exceptions immediately to be noted, a new set of antitypes are typed. We have seen that up to Jacob's flight from his home he types Spiritual Israel, while Esau types Fleshly Israel. Then from the outstart of Jacob's flight up to Gen. 35: 29 Jacob types the star-members and their special helpers, i.e., the special leaders of God's people from Pentecost until the end of the Epiphany. We have further seen that ten of Jacob's sons, from the standpoint of the Gospel-Age picture, as a whole type the ten denominations of Christendom, Joseph (increase), the Parousia Little Flock and its movement, and



Benjamin, the Epiphany Great Company and its movement. And because Gen. 34: 1-31 and 35: 16-29 refer to the Epiphany, in the exposition of Gen. 34 and 35: 23-26 Epiphany antitypes were given. And beginning with Gen. 37, the Epiphany setting is the antitype of the rest of the book in its smallest application. Having given the Epiphany antitypes of Jacob's sons in expounding Gen. 34 and 35: 23-26, the only additional remark necessary as introductory to the study of the rest of Genesis is that everywhere from Gen. 37 onward Jacob represents the Little Flock, except at his death he also, for parallel dispensation purposes, types our Lord as founding the Church on the twelve Apostles, and his sons, accordingly, type the twelve Apostles. We will here, by the Lord's grace, give briefly the Epiphany picture from Gen. 37 to the end of the book, remarking that additionally Joseph typed (1) Jesus, (2) the 49 star-members and (3) J., in certain features, as the Epiphany messenger from the standpoint (1) of his humiliations and (2) of his exaltations. From here on (3) will be the viewpoint.


The Little Flock during the Epiphany continued to live in the sphere of God's Truth and Spirit (37: 1). The rest of Genesis is a history of the events of this period as related to it, the Little Flock, the Levite groups and J., whose ministry (1) from June, 1911 to June 27, 1914 and (2) from June 27, 1914 until Oct. 31, 1916 was a special preparation for his work as the Epiphany messenger, and from Oct. 31, 1916 to Oct. 31, 1956 is a fulfillment of his work as the Epiphany messenger, a work that is specifically that of a Little Flock brother (one of the Divine class, symbolized by the 7 in the 17) toward the Great Company and Youthful Worthies (two classes of natures lower than the Divine nature, hence symbolized by the 10 in the 17). During the periods (June, 1911 to June 27, 1914 and June 27, 1914 to Oct. 31, 1916) preparatory for his ministry as that messenger, J. was busily engaged in serving God's Flock, and that in special association with crown-losers, who, unorganized at that



time, were all anticipatorily counted by God as Kohathites in their four subdivisions; and seeing the mischief that certain of their leaders were doing the brethren, e.g., E. W. Brenneisen, at Bethel, and G. B. Raymond, in pilgrim work, as shown in Chapter V, J. brought these matters to the attention of the Little Flock, representatively in Bro. Russell, not in the spirit of tale-bearing, but in the spirit that would protect the Flock from their evil influence (v. 2).


The Church in Bro. Russell favored J. during the second of those preparatory periods above all the other prominent brethren, because of his having been developed by the Little Flock in Bro. Russell in his ripest wisdom, for which reason during that period the Little Flock in Bro. Russell promoted J. to the most responsible work of the pilgrim service, e.g., during this period (1) he caused him increasingly to attend more conventions and increasingly to take more prominent and frequent parts on their programs, including quite a number of chairmanships, than any other pilgrim, and selected him as the only extra-Bethel pilgrim to deliver one of the lectures in the series of lectures given in the N. Y. Temple the summer of 1916; (2) he arranged in May 1916 for J. to be appointed to serve especially in the larger ecclesias, and had his routes arranged to this end; (3) he arranged pilgrim trips for him that were especially intended to reconcile contending parties in divided ecclesias, perhaps the most difficult form of the pilgrim work; (4) he arranged for J. to have more public meetings than any other pilgrim; (5) he arranged for J. to have regular follow-up colportresses to devote all their time to visit those who left inquiry cards at his public meetings; (6) he appointed him to introduce the Pastoral work at conventions and in the larger ecclesias; and (7) he appointed him to do the work in Britain that, quite probably unknown to Bro. Russell, actually was to be the first part of his ministry as the Epiphany messenger, i.e., that part of the work that he as God's hand has been doing with Azazel's Goat (v. 3).



Such promotion of J. by the Little Flock in Bro. Russell as the pilgrim to do the most responsible work of all the pilgrims, as an evidence of his being the most favored of them by the Little Flock in Bro. Russell, stirred up, sad to say, the envy and ill-will of the other leading pilgrims, especially those at Bethel; and they showed this in their speaking of him in an unfriendly way (v. 4), e.g., J.F.R., on learning that J. was appointed to take the European trip, told J. at Oakland, Md., Oct. 30, 1916, that he wished that he himself were the one who was to take it. At the time J. did not think that J.F.R. envied him, but in view of v. 4 and of the fulfillments of vs. 5-11, 18-24, which typed events in 1917, as will shortly be shown, he now believes that before Bro. Russell's death J.F.R. envied him (v. 4). During Feb., 1917, J. first began to see from the Bible that he was appointed to be what proved to be the Epiphany messenger, the proofs of which are found in the preceding chapters, though on account of the leading brethren, including himself, believing that Bro. Russell, having died without giving the penny, was to have a successor, i.e., the steward of the penny parable, J. temporarily believed that his office was that of the steward of that parable, which thing J. told, first a number of British brethren, first of all J. Hemery, who had already concluded that himself was antitypical Mordecai, and who showed the envy of ill-will when J. proved that he could not be such, since he bowed down to H.J.S., antitypical Haman; then to pacify J.F.R., who after Nov. 3 assumed himself to be the steward of the penny parable, J. cabled it to him in a wire of which J.F.R. later made dishonest use at the first of "two hearings before the Board" and later before the Bethel family and still later in Harvest Siftings. J.F.R. repeatedly showed by expression and act the envy of ill-will thereover, especially in the second of the "two hearings before the Board," when J. proved from 2 Sam. 23: 8-23 and 1 Chro. 11: 10-25 that J.F.R. was the seventh, and that J. was the second ranking Truth warrior of the Parousia. This same



envy of ill-will infected the leaders of the various Levite groups (v. 5). J. told his pertinent thought, to the effect that what proved to be the Levite brethren would be subject to him in his executive office (vs. 6, 7). This they greatly and increasingly resented, especially throughout the period from Feb. to Dec., 1917, i.e., while Levites were being manifested as such under the bad Levite leadership of H.J.S., J. H., J.F.R., M. Sturgeon, etc.


But there was another phase than that of executorship in J.'s office powers as the Epiphany messenger, i.e., that of special mouthpieceship for the Lord; and the disclosure of this phase to the Levite leaders, as well as to the Little Flock, by J. is brought out in vs. 9-11; for J. saw from certain Scriptures, indicated above, that, not only executorship as to the priestly work was committed to him, but also mouthpieceship for the Lord Jesus, which put into his teaching care not only the Truth (the moon), but also the Little Flock (the sun) and the Levites of the Great Company and Youthful Worthies (the eleven stars, v. 9). This J. told to the priestly and Levitical brethren, the Little Flock brethren rebuking him therefore, as they saw the implications of J.'s claim to having charge of the Truth (v. 10). But the Little Flock neither rejected the thought nor envied J. thereover, but made it a matter of study, while this thought increased Levitical envy and ill-will against him (v. 11). These two disclosures by J. occurred increasingly on both phases from Feb. to Dec., 1917, and thereafter on mouthpieceship alone into March, 1918. Vs. 12-17 treat of antitypes from Oct. 7, 1916 to June 20, 1917. On Oct. 7, 1916, the Little Flock in Bro. Russell, and Nov. 2-10, 1916, in the Board by the Executive Committee, among other things, announced to J. that he was to go to Europe as pilgrim and investigator, the Board through that committee giving him power of attorney in all the business and affairs of the Society wherever he was sent outside of America. J. expressed willingness to undertake the mission and left on Nov. 11, 1916, in a condition of friendship to all, and



sought to find the brethren in one accord (Shechem, accord, vs. 13, 14). But J. wandered in a more or less mistaken view of his office functions, which he mistakenly understood to mean those of the steward of the penny parable, and did not find the brethren in one accord (Shechem, accord). While in this mistaken condition J. was asked by M. Sturgeon what he sought; and he told it. Then the former told him how Bro. Russell had given the penny, and thus was the parable's steward, and then showed him the real condition of things at Bethel and the general shepherdizing of God's flock, i.e., that the brethren were divided into two groups, those standing for Bro. Russell's arrangements and those standing for J.F.R.'s arrangements as to Truth work in feeding the flock (Dothan, two wells). Accordingly, J. mentally went to and met the brethren so divided at Brooklyn, even as in London he found a like condition, not noted in the type (vs. 15-17).


J.F.R. having announced at the Bethel table before J.'s return from Britain that the latter was (allegedly) insane, for a time the Bethel brethren held aloof from him, both physically and mentally, a great contrast from the conditions that prevailed when he left Bethel on Nov. 11, 1916, for Britain. Nevertheless, for the most part this aloofness increasingly passed away, when the brethren saw that J.F.R.'s above-mentioned announcement was untrue; still the leading brethren, first "the present management," then later others at Bethel and, finally, even the four directors conspired against J., "the present management" counseling to cut him off, both from fellowship and service, entirely (v. 18), as one who (allegedly) imagined that he was the Divinely-authorized executive and mouthpiece (v. 19). Not only did "the present management" advise such cutting off, but additionally published untrue slanders against him, agreeing to charge that a demon possessed him; and thereafter they would see what would come of his claims (v. 20); but I.F. Hoskins, June 20-22, 1917, and his supporters (Reuben), hearing of



this plan, fought it so thoroughly, in so far as the cutting off was concerned, that it was in that part entirely given up, he and the other three directors agreeing to the slandering of J.'s British mission and work, as advocated by J.F.R., assisted especially by W.E.V. and more or less passively by A. N. Pierson, who up to July 10, 1917, had not heard J.'s defense, and who after hearing it took his view of his British mission and work. I.F. Hoskins' purpose was to gain time and then deliver J. from J.F.R.'s and W.E.V.'s fell purposes into the safe-keeping of the Little Flock (vs. 21, 22). But laying hold of J., they, from June 20 to June 27, 1917, stripped him of his credential-sanctioned authority, as well as his special pilgrim powers, with which he was invested as bona fide authority and powers (v. 23). Then they made him the object of a world-wide slander campaign, beginning at Bethel, proceeding through J.F.R.'s whispering falsehoods to his prospective pseudo-directors, a letter campaign and Harvest Siftings, Nos. 1 and 2, and coming to a head in the numerous conventions held in 1917, the straw-vote campaign and the voting shareholders' meeting, Jan. 6, 1918. In this slandered condition J. found no comfort and refreshment (v. 24).


Considering that they had finished J. forever as an influence among Truth people, the Levite leaders and their supporters appropriated to themselves what they could lay hands on, the Merarite leaders and their supporters appropriating to themselves the Society powers, and the "Opposition" leaders and their supporters, whose cause was distinct from J.'s, but whose cause they declined to espouse, though saying some things in his favor, even as their paper, Light After Darkness, distinctly avows, appropriating to themselves various powers as various of them severally were able to get these from the "Opposition"; but they noticed that there were genuine sympathizers (Ishmaelites, whom God hears) of J. coming from a strong position of truth and righteousness on their way to Epiphany matters and conditions (Egypt, fortress), where they would engage



in symbolic trade with graces and comfort amid sufferings (v. 25). A.I. Ritchie, R.H. Hirsh and M. Sturgeon, cherishing a kindred feeling for J., and not desiring him to be cut off entirely, reasoned that what proved to be the Kohathites and certain Gershonites would gain no profit from his being cut off entirely and from their hiding the deed (v. 26); hence they suggested that they dispose of J. to his real sympathizers; and thus they would be guiltless of his entire cutting off, since he was of a kindred spirit with them. This suggestion appealed to the Kohathites and certain Gershonites (v. 27). In the meantime the Merarites as erroneous strife-breeders (Midianites, strifeful ones), as bargain-makers, passed by and beyond them, as done in a fellowship way with J. forever, though later they shared by their course at the Society officers' election in selling J. to those of the "Opposition" who were the main supporters of the Fort Pitt Committee. Thereafter the Kohathites and certain Gershonites vindicated J. from the untruthful slanderous condition in which he had been put and disposed of him to his sympathizers for the price of their gaining the powers of Kohathite and Gershonite Levites. And J.'s sympathizers brought him into Epiphany conditions and matters in humiliation (v. 28).


Intent on fully delivering J. from his situation and on bringing him safely to the protection of the Little Flock, the section of the Gershonites who were not partakers in the symbolic sale of J. and who were led by I.F. Hoskins, returned to the task of vindicating J. from the malicious slanders in which he was involved; but finding him removed from that condition, and fearing the worst, they did violence to their graces in their disappointment (v. 29). Going to the others, they told these that J. was undoubtedly entirely cut off, and demanded to know on what mental journey they should betake themselves for search of him (v. 30). Now faced by the problem as to how to account to the Little Flock for J.'s disappearance from among what were Levites, certain of them decided to tell them the



story that J. had as a New Creature been destroyed by a demon which gained possession of him, and as such had ruined his New Creature unto the Second Death; and to lend plausibility to the story they claimed that J. in his alleged demoniac insanity had broken up irretrievably the British Church, his guiltiness having therein, according to their charge, stained his executive and pilgrim powers (v. 31). Then his powers allegedly so stained they presented to the Little Flock, claiming that their investigations resulted in the findings that they presented in their various slanders against J. and asked the Little Flock whether they could recognize them as J.'s. The poor, guileless Little Flock, accustomed to getting only truth from the Society publications and its various mouthpieces, recognizing J.'s powers and, accepting the falsehoods told them by the prospective Levite leaders and groups, heart-brokenly believed that an evil angel had destroyed J.'s New Creature (v. 33). Doing violence to their graces and putting on the disgraces of inordinate grief, disappointment and despair, they mourned him many years as a Second Deather (v. 34). Despite the efforts of the Great Company and Youthful Worthy brethren to comfort them, they refused to accept their comforting assurances, moaning that unto the end of their life they would mourn for J. (v. 35). Some of J.'s sympathizers, turning strifeful at the Fort Pitt Convention, Jan., 7, 1918, by the formation of the Fort Pitt Committee, of which they made him a member, sold him to that committee's main supporters as the Lord's specially chosen officer over those who guarded His interests, even as the Societyites by their strifeful course in their 1918 election shared therein (v. 36).


In Gen. 38 various pictures are given typing the genesis and development of the four groups of the Kohathites, who are typed by Judah, the subject of Gen. 38. During this period, i.e., Oct., 1916-March, 1918, the Kohathite Levites in withdrawing gradually from the other Levites came to J. (Hirah, nobility), as the latter dwelt in the rest of faith (38: 1),



and there took up with the view (daughter … Shuah, wealth) that the Lord's priestly work (these Kohathites, of course, believed themselves to be priests) should not be controlled by corporations or committees; and they in M. Sturgeon developed out of this truth the Uzzielite Kohathite movement (Er, watcher), which, in its observing of prevalent Truth people's conditions, took an oppositional stand toward the Fort Pitt Committee, especially toward J. (v. 3). Again, from this same doctrine the Kohathites in A.I. Ritchie developed the Hebronite movement (Onan, strong), which with a friendly exterior worked underhandedly against the Fort Pitt Committee, especially against J. (v. 4). A third time the Kohathites out of this doctrine developed a movement, the Olsonite movement (Shelah, petition, request); at that time the Kohathites were in a deceptive condition; for Olsonism was a bundle of deceptions (Chezib, deceptive, v. 5). The Kohathites took for the Uzzielite movement the teaching (Tamar, palm) that the general elders of the Church were free and independent of the authority of any other general elder, a teaching that is true, except when there is a star-member officiating (v. 6). But the Uzzielite movement did evil in a variety of ways, e.g., in Brooklyn without class authorization it formed a class out of members of the Brooklyn "Opposition" ecclesia, and under M. Sturgeon's lead studied with many erroneous conclusions Revelation. It under M. Sturgeon's envious opposition to J. fought J.'s view of the last related acts of Elijah and Elisha; and when the ecclesia disapproved of the existence of the unauthorized class and of its study of Revelation, under M. Sturgeon's manipulation Hattie O. Henderson published as venomous an attack on J. as Harvest Siftings, and passed it out in the ecclesia as "a love letter." Wherever M. Sturgeon would do pilgrim work he would sometimes covertly, sometimes overtly attack J. One of these attacks, favored by his movement, he made to J.'s face in a sermon preached in the Brooklyn "Opposition" ecclesia. These and other things led to the disruption and



extinction of the Uzzielite movement as such under M. Sturgeon's leadership (v. 7).


This movement being dead, the Kohathites in A.I. Ritchie urged the Hebronite movement to use the same doctrine of the independence of the general elders from one another to resuscitate a movement unto the Uzzielite movement (v. 8). But the Hebronite movement in A.I. Ritchie, knowing that such a movement would not be its own, went through the motions of forming it, but deliberately wasted its pertinent energies; and for this God destroyed the Hebronite movement, though individual members of it still continue (vs. 9, 10). Thereupon the Kohathites in C. Olson told the same doctrine in its adherents to wait in solitariness until the Olsonite movement would be properly developed; and it would then unite itself with it. However the Kohathites in C. Olson did not mean this honestly, because it feared that by such ill-omened union the Olsonite movement would pass out of existence. Hence without being united with any other movement this doctrine in its adherents remained in its originators' abode (v. 11). In time the teaching that the work of the priests is independent from subjection to corporations and committees sickened and became inactive, and thus passed away; and the Kohathites in R.H. Hirsh gave up mourning its death as an inactive thing. They in R.H. Hirsh, in late 1919, who was in association with J., sought to gain fruitage from brethren in their service (v. 12).


The teaching of the independence of general elders in its supporters learned that the Kohathites in R.H. Hirsh were seeking such fruitage in their portion of service (v. 13). This teaching in its supporters disguised itself, at the entrance to matters of both the Little Flock and the Kohathites, and did this because in its adherents it saw that it was being purposely withheld from union with the Olsonites (v. 14). The Kohathites in R.H. Hirsh failed to see its real import in its relation to J.'s ministry, thinking it was a teaching that might be used for their selfish purposes (v. 15). Deceived