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

343

From these questions it will be seen that the Treasury Department believed that the Laymen's Home Missionary Movement was not a movement, but a corporation, an association or a society, i.e., a symbolic wagon. In our reply, dated Nov. 27, 1933 (3: 58 4/5 P.M., Large Friday), we assured the Department that the Movement was none of these and thus had no by-laws, charter or article of incorporation. Then we gave a description of  the Movement in about a page and three-fourths of a single spaced typewritten letter, 8 x 11 inches. The agent of the Department who wrote to us was a Roman Catholic. This prompted us, while giving a clear and fearless statement, on the nature, work and finances of the Movement, tactfully to present the matter so as not to prejudice a Romanist (Mark 15: 11, "boldly"; John 19: 38, "secretly for fear of the Jews"). On Dec. 21 (4: 08 2/5 P.M., Large Friday) the Treasury Department's agent in Philadelphia wrote to us to the effect that he had on Dec. 2, 1933 (4: 00'4/5 P.M., Large Friday), forwarded ours of Nov. 27 to the Department for a ruling on whether the Laymen's Home Missionary Movement is to be considered an exempt Movement, which, if so considered, would mean that its contributors would be exempt from income taxes on their contributions up to 15% of their entire net income. He further stated that the Department at Washington further required that we make our statement as an affidavit, and, because it was not yet certain as to the Movement's nature, that it requested that we add to the explanations in ours of Nov. 27 the following: (1) who has title to the Movement's finances and property; (2) to whom and for what purpose the funds of the Movement have been paid; and (3) that we give a classified list of receipts and disbursements for the last year.

 

(88) On Dec. 28 (4: 11 1/5 P.M., Large Friday) we answered, incorporating the new things requested and the pertinent matters of the one of Nov. 27 into

 

344

one letter, which was of nearly five full pages, 8 x 11 inches, single spaced typewritten matter. In this letter we claimed exemption on the legal ground that, while the involved property: the magazines, books, booklets, plates, etc., were ours, and the contributions were deposited in the bank in our name, this was not because the contributions were our personal property, but because they were placed in our care as a trustee. On Dec. 30, 1933, we handed our letter of Dec. 28 to the Department's agent here; and after he, his lawyer and we discussed the subject, we were all agreed that as a trustee we were entitled to the exemption; and the agent here so recommended the matter to the Department in his communication accompanying our letter of Dec. 28. Then followed a long silence. On March 15 the legal counsel of the Treasury Department at Washington wrote out an opinion and sent it to the Department's agent here, to the effect that the Laymen's Home Missionary Movement was a non-existent thing, i.e., the priesthood was not working as such a movement, rather it was the private business "venture of Mr. Paul S.L. Johnson," i.e., it was only a name for the private business of Paul S.L. Johnson, and that therefore exemption was denied. On March 16 the Philadelphia Internal Revenue agent mailed us a summary of this decision; and we received it March 17, recognizing it immediately as the spear-thrust. Several days later we visited this agent, telling him that we considered the decision unjust, and then asked, since the government's view implied that our contributions were private gifts to us personally, whether we had to report them as a part of the income of our (alleged) "private business." He replied that gifts are not a part of a business' net income, hence were not to be reported in an income tax declaration, which means that, since in America there has never been a net income of $5,000.00 in the business end of our work, we need make no income tax return. In the series of facts

 

345

just given we have the antitype of all Joseph's dealing with Pilate and the related acts up to and including the latter's permission to take Jesus' body down from the cross and to bury it. Let us now look at these facts as such antitypes.

 

(89) The Treasury's letter of Nov. 23 seemingly is no part of the antitype. It simply furnished an occasion of requesting the body of the Large Jesus, antitypical of Joseph's requesting Jesus' body. Joseph's request for Jesus' body finds its antitype in our letter of Nov. 27, 1933. Please note its time: 3: 58 4/5 P.M. of Large Friday, which would agree quite well with the time of Joseph's arrival in Pilate's presence. At the time we wrote this letter we had for nearly five months seen and proclaimed that the death of the Large Jesus, the beginning of the end of the Priesthood's public mouthpieceship, had set in by June 28, 1933. Hence we were asking for possession of the symbolically dead body by our letter of Nov. 27, 1933, freedom from government control, i.e., as to responsibility to it on taxes. The Treasury's letter in answer to ours of Nov. 27, 1933, to the Philadelphia Internal Revenue agent was antitypical Pilate's unbelievingly asking the centurion whether Jesus was already dead; for the Department's letter implied that the Laymen's Home Missionary Movement might be an existent organization and asked for information that might help it to find out whether it was so or not. That part of the agent's letter that accompanied our answer of Dec. 28, 1933, and that implied that the Laymen's Home Missionary Movement was not a corporation or a society, was the antitype of the centurion's reply that Jesus was dead, i.e., to the Department the Movement, before by it believed to be a Society, was thus reported by its agent to be non-existent as a Society, which to it would imply the priesthood was not cooperating in such a movement, while that part of his letter that recommended exemption on the ground that we were in the

 

346

Movement's [priesthood's] actual activities functioning as a trustee, a steward, corresponds to the centurion's cry: "This was a righteous man"—one just before the law as to exemption (Luke 23: 47). The counsel of the Treasury Department in holding the thought that to the government the Movement was non-existent [and therefore was not a priestly movement] antitypes the soldier who recognized that Jesus was dead (John 19: 33). His debatingly writing that thought was the spear-thrust.

 

(90) The following will clarify this: David's spearmen type that Servant's warriors who controverted by writings; his swordsmen, that Servant's warriors who controverted by discourses; his slingers, that Servant's warriors who controverted by the question and answer method; and his archers, that Servant's warriors who controverted by sharp piercing Bible and other sayings in conversations. Accordingly, the counsel's letter in controversy against our defense of our claim of exemption as a trustee was the spear-thrust, delivered into what he considered non- existent, dead. The government's ruling expressed by its Philadelphia agent, to the effect that (1) contributions, i.e., gifts, were not to be considered as a part of a business net income in the sight of the income tax law, and that (2) we need make no report unless the net income be $5,000.00 or more—a thing that never happens, because no profit is made on our publications, which are actually sold at a loss, made up by contributions—corresponds to Pilate's giving Joseph permission to take Jesus' body down from the cross and bury it; for in the twofold involved rulings the government gave up to us the Laymen's Home Missionary Movement free from all government claims upon it; for while its ruling against giving the Movement exemption is against the interests of its contributors, its ruling on the other two points actually leaves the Movement as free from making income returns as though it had granted it exemption.

 

347

During this conversation with the Department's Philadelphia agent he showed us a list of organizations, etc., that enjoyed such exemption, among which were hospitals and clinics for sick dogs and cats! In this connection he remarked you and your supporters are doing a good religious work that certainly deserves exemption greatly above such dog and cat hospitals and clinics! Perhaps this statement was the antitype of the Centurion saying, "This was the Son of God" (Mark 15: 29). Please note the difference in both the type and antitype between this and the expression, "This was a righteous man" (Luke 23: 47). At the Detroit Convention, May 26, 1934, we made a lengthy statement on the government's and our income tax exemption dealings and on the earthquake of Matt. 27: 51-54. This report on the former fact proved to be the antitype of taking the body of Jesus down from the cross, the primary act of preparing that body for burial. How so? That statement started both Bro. Jolly and the writer in their work as the second part of the burial's preparation, as we will later show, and started the conventioners into a sympathetic cooperation therein.

 

(91) A careful listener at the Detroit Convention to our explanations on the events of our dealings with the U.S. Treasury Department and to our proofs against the genuineness of the earthquake and Ancient Worthies' resurrection references in Matt. 27: 51-54, was Bro. Jolly. This led him shortly after the Convention to prepare a discourse on the interpolated character of these verses, as a vindication of the correctness of our view of the large eight wonderful days against the charge that it was a false view on account of Armageddon's not occurring. Such a discourse would, of course, preserve the symbolically dead Large Jesus from the charge of corruption with deception, which the Levites charge against the Epiphany Priestly movement. Having in a question and answer in The

 

348

Present Truth, Nos. 193, 190, pars. 7, 8, reproduced toward the end of this chapter, given the arguments against the genuineness of vs. 52, 53, given by us at the Detroit Convention and used by Bro. Jolly in his pertinent discourse prepared shortly after that Convention and then by him delivered in many places during his subsequent pilgrim visits that summer and fall, we will here omit them and give those that he offered in proof of the interpolated character of the earthquake references in vs. 51, 54: (1) If the earthquake had occurred we should naturally expect it to be mentioned by several evangelists, who mention severally many a less important event, while in the Matthew passage alone is any reference made to the earthquake. (2) The juxtaposition of the earthquake and the recognizedly interpolated character of vs. 52, 53, would arouse suspicion as to the genuineness of the earthquake reference, and that naturally.

 

(92) We proceed with Bro. Jolly's third proof: (3) The relation of cause and effect as between the earthquake, as cause, and the opening of the graves, as effect, suggests the likelihood of the interpolation of the earthquake as the ground for what is stated in the recognizedly interpolated character of the reference to the Ancient Worthies' resurrection. (4) Had there been an earthquake, Matthew would likely have stated the fact before telling of the vail's being rent, as giving its cause. (5) Mark and Luke would also have mentioned it before mentioning the rending of the vail. (6) The omission of the word "other" in v. 54 before the word "things" would not likely have occurred, if the earthquake had really happened. (7) The fulfillment of everything in the large sixth wonderful day as due and in its chronological order, and the non-fulfillment of an antitype for the earthquake, suggests the interpolated character of the earthquake reference. So far Bro. Jolly's points on the subject. On Nov. 25, 1934, i.e., 22 symbolic minutes after the large sixth.

 

349

wonderful day ended, the Lord gave us the corroboration of Biblical Numerics as to the interpolated character of the earthquake and Ancient Worthies' resurrection references  in Matt. 27: 51-54; and the next day we wrote out our finding on the subject as an article for The Present Truth, No. 194, reproduced at the end of this chapter. In Bro. Jolly's preparing that discourse we find the antitype of Nicodemus securing the 100-weight (the square of 10, the number of perfection in natures lower than divine, Nicodemus' bringing these to preserve the perfect humanity of Jesus from corruption) of myrrh and aloes (respectively Bro. Jolly's counter-corruption arguments against the Ancient Worthies' resurrection and the earthquake as preservatives against the error-corruption of the Large  Jesus claimed by the Levites); and in his delivering that discourse we find the antitype of Nicodemus putting these preserving spices into contact with Jesus' body, as a part of its preparation for its burial (John 19: 39, 40).

 

(93) We read that Joseph not only took down (with others' help) the body of Jesus from the cross, but also bought fine clean linen cloth, and with and in it (and the spices) wrapped the body of Jesus as a preparation for its burial (Matt. 27: 59; Mark 15: 46; Luke 23: 53; John 19: 40). The antitype of the buying the, fine linen cloth we find in the writer's preparing the first discourse on Daniel,  which later appeared in The Present Truth, No. 191. The antitype of wrapping the body in the fine clean linen cloth we find in the writer's delivering that discourse. In Israel such a preparation of a body for burial was the first of the three tributes of respect given to the dead, the second being the funeral and the third the burial. Some explanations will clarify this matter. In Bible symbols fine linen represents the righteous acts of saints (Rev. 19: 8). Righteous acts of our Pastor as the antitype of Daniel in Dan. 1-6, were set forth in that

 

350

discourse and article. But some may object that, while that article set forth righteous acts of our Pastor, it did not do so of the whole Large Jesus. We reply that since he was their main leader and they cooperated with him in most of the events and teachings of Dan. 1-6, they are involved in what is said of him. Hence complimentary things said of a leader include the led when they cooperate with the leader in those complimentary things, e.g., the army shared in the honor of a triumph accorded an able victorious Roman general. Hence the preparation of that discourse was the antitype of the buying of the linen that, therefore, symbolizes the righteous acts of the Large Jesus. It will be noted further that Daniel did not type our Pastor in all respects, but only in his mouthpieceship to the world on the religious bearing of secular things; hence the antitype implies the Large  Jesus as mouthpiece toward the public on the religious bearing of secular things. The things said of our Pastor in that discourse and article are very complimentary of him; hence are fitting as a partial tribute of respect to the Large Jesus. The delivery of that discourse and its publication as an article enclosed [clothed] our Pastor, and thus in consequence the Large Jesus, in these complimentary sayings, as a tribute of respect to them.

 

(94) What antityped the funeral and burial of Jesus? The preparation of the discourse on Dan. 7-12, and its writing out as an article, antityped the funeral of Jesus; and the delivery of that discourse, and its being afterward published as an article in The Present Truth, No. 192, were the antitype of the burial. A funeral is a public tribute of respect for the dead; and people that come to a funeral come there with that intention, at least externally expressed. Undoubtedly that discourse as prepared and as later written out for publication was a tribute of respect to our Pastor, not only from the standpoint of its contents, but

 

351

also from the standpoint of its and its predecessor's being printed as the annual memorial article for him. Hence, for the reason given in the preceding paragraph, the preparation of that discourse and the writing of that article were a tribute of respect to the memory of the Large Jesus, hence was an antitypical funeral. So, too, is a burial a tribute of respect to the dead. That discourse and article on Dan. 7-12 was certainly a tribute of respect to our Pastor and, accordingly, to the Large Jesus. A burial is an encasing of one in a tomb, regardless of whether that tomb is a grave in the sense of a covering of earth or of a sepulchre. Certainly, Bro. Russell, and thus the Large Jesus, was encased in that discourse and article, as in a tomb. Moreover, in that discourse other leaders of the Large Jesus, as antitypical Gabriel, are mentioned in complimentary terms, which would also include the entire class of those led by these—the Large Jesus. It will be noted that the burial was in a rock-hewn sepulchre (Matt. 27: 60; Mark 15: 46; Luke 23: 53), which, since a rock often represents Divine Truth (Matt. 16: 18), represents in this case the Divine Truth typically contained in Dan. 7-12, as encompassing Bro. Russell and certain other leaders, and thus the whole Large Jesus.

 

(95) It will be further noted that the tomb was one that Joseph made, typical of the fact that the antitypical Joseph would prepare the antitypical tomb. Furthermore, it was a new tomb (John 19: 41). This types the fact that, while our Pastor gave us a number of indications of himself as typed in Dan. 1-6, the thought as given in the discourse and article on Dan. 7-12, that in Dan. 7-12 Daniel also types our Pastor, was an entirely new one. It had never before been seen and set forth. The fact that never before had anyone been buried in Joseph's sepulchre (Luke 23: 53; John 19: 41) types the fact that never before was one encased as a tribute of respect in the typical

 

352

Divine Truth of Dan. 7-12. The haste to accomplish the burial (John 19: 42) before 6 P.M. typifies the haste that we made in preparing and giving the discourse for the strengthening of the weak brethren and in writing it out; because in the latter case it had to be written out, transcribed and corrected before Sept. 29, 1934, the day we took it to the printer in order that it would be completely through the press before we left the Bible House, Oct. 9, on our fall pilgrim trip. The burial ended with closing the door of the sepulchre and the rolling of the huge stone against it. The closing of the door of the sepulchre (Matt. 27: 60; Mark 15: 46) types the ending of the exposition of Dan. 12 in the statement that Bro. Russell would in the beginning of the Millennial reign enter fully into his Millennial office. The great stone types the teaching set forth in the end of the discourse and article on Dan. 7-12, that Bro. Russell, the chief earthly leader of the Large Jesus, is the one on our Lord's right hand in the Kingdom, which again is complimentary to the Large Jesus as having had him as its chief earthly leader. The rolling of that stone to the door of the sepulchre types the firm proof offered on Bro. Russell as being the one on our Lord's right, which also involves complimentarily those led by him—the Large Jesus, even as that stone made the sepulchre secure. The two Marys  and the other women that came with Jesus from Galilee (Matt. 27: 61; Mark 15: 47; Luke 23: 55), following the body to the grave, seeing the sepulchre and how the body was laid, type the better members of the antitypical Kohathites and Merarites and better Levites of lesser groups participating in the antitypical funeral and burial, while the two Marys sitting over against the sepulchre  types the better antitypical Kohathites and Merarites mourning over the death of the Larger Jesus, Jewish mourners sitting while mourning.

 

(96) The above 20 paragraphs and the preceding

 

353

ones on the large sixth wonderful day, give us clear antitypes of every general thing that occurred on the Friday of our Lord's death, which demonstrates the correctness of our understanding. And whenever the type offers a time indication, the antitype in every such case occurred at the corresponding time, which completes the demonstration. We were mistaken in only one thing that we expected as probable, i.e., the American Armageddon not occurring before Oct., 1934, which with a fair degree of faith we expected as probable, though we cautioned the brethren several times that it might not happen then, though we were inclined to think it would (The Present Truth, Nos. 62, 14, par. 4; 145, 198, par. 1). Our expectations, which were never expressed otherwise than as probable, were not in this particular fulfilled. But in view of the now proven interpolatory character of the reference to the earthquake, the only thing on which we based that probable expectation, even this failure strongly proves the correctness of our general position; for everything else in the story antityping, the expected earthquake should not have happened in the specified time, since it was no part of this Divinely inspired type. This, we say, all the stronger proves our viewpoint of the large eight wonderful days; for if an interpolation had an antitype, that fact should throw doubt on the entire viewpoint, and reversely, if it had none. We are being greatly accused by those Levites whom the antitype proves to be the large impenitent thief, as being a false prophet because of our expectation [expressed as a probability] of America's Armageddon coming before Oct., 1934. These parts of the large impenitent thief in their shouts, "Johnson is a false prophet," ignore the fact that every Divinely given part of the history so far due has fulfilled as we forecast it, which evidently proves that we are not a false prophet. The many true forecasts should have made them draw the reverse conclusion.

 

354

But they do not see these and they focus their eyes on the one mistake (based on a supposedly correct Scripture) made amid perhaps a hundred correct forecasts. In this they remind us of a person who once saw an exceptionally beautiful picture, having on it but one lone fly speck, which fly speck was the only thing about the picture that that person could see! If these members of the large impenitent thief prefer looking, at a fly speck to a very beautiful picture—well, every man to his taste! We are sure the Priesthood has better taste than that by a great deal!

 

(97) Yes, a probability mistake, which we regret, was made. But after all, it was both an inconsequential mistake and an inevitable one. It in nowise impinged against any truth item, nor any feature of Christ-likeness. It really could not cause a sober-minded and sympathetically disposed person great regret that Armageddon has been longer in coming than we expected. Surely, only very immature persons could be sorry that Armageddon has not come so soon as we thought it would likely come. If bad Levites scoff at the mistake, let that not cause us dismay; for they will surely seek and find something to scoff at, despite our best efforts to prevent it. If weak brethren are somewhat shaken thereat, as doubtless some have been, let us remember that if their hearts are right, the good Lord will use the experience for their good; for He will never let a faithful one stumble unto a fall, even if He is pleased sorely to try him. And if such a weak one's heart is not good, the Lord wants such an one to stumble; and He sometimes is pleased to allow mistakes, even of His most faithful servants, to stumble such. So, beloved, let us remember that the Lord can and will work good out of this mistake, which in all fairness in facing the facts must be called an inconsequential one; and if the large impenitent thief does not have the fairness to concede this, let us remember the source of the unfairness,

 

355

which will enable us to put a proper value on their views.

 

(98) Mistake that it was, every just person who understands Biblical symbols and our view of the wonderful days must admit the following extenuating points: (1) Assuming that the earthquake of Matt: 27: 51, 54 was genuine, in harmony with Biblical symbols we were warranted in accepting the passage as referring to a great revolution. (2) The great revolution that all Bible Students have for 40 years or more been expecting is Armageddon. (3) The setting of the antitype being mainly American, we were quite warranted by considerations (1) and (2) in applying the earthquake to America's Armageddon. (4) The factually proven time setting of the large sixth wonderful day required the expected earthquake to come between Feb., 1933, and Oct., 1934, if the earthquake  reference were genuine. (5) The reference to the earthquake is without exception in all Greek MSS. of the New Testament, containing Matt. 27. (6) Apart from Biblical Numerics, there is no compelling argument, like doctrinal, logical and factual errors, as is the case with the reference to the resurrection of the Ancient Worthies in Matt. 27: 52, 53, in and about the earthquake reference that proves its fraudulent character. And (7) apart from Biblical Numerics as a proof of the charge against the earthquake reference as an interpolation, we could not, apart from the fulfillment not occurring, as it did occur with every inspired part of the story of our Lord's last day on earth, know that the passage was fraudulent. These seven considerations demonstrate that under the circumstances the mistake, apart from Biblical Numerics, was inevitable, and, therefore, was to be expected under the circumstances, and that, therefore, we should not be blamed much for it.

 

(99) But one disposed to blame us might say: You are acquainted with the science of Biblical Numerics;

 

356

why did you not years ago apply to the earthquake reference the test of Biblical Numerics, which, if done, would have saved you from the mistake? In reply, we would say that we did not suspect the earthquake reference to be an interpolation and, therefore, did not apply to the Biblical Numerics as a test of its genuineness, though to several pilgrim brethren we remarked that the earthquake reference (even as almost any other passage could be interpolated) might be an interpolation; but the thought of this possibility was set aside in our mind by the fact that v. 54, as well as v. 51, refers to the earthquake. Then, too, the earthquake reference could have been Divinely given as the reason for the rending of the vail in twain from top to bottom, despite the fact that the more likely order for its giving would be before the statement on the rending of the vail. These two considerations, combined with the fact that all pertinent Greek MSS. contain the section, convinced us fully that the earthquake reference was genuine. Therefore they and the seven reasons given in the preceding paragraph restrained us from applying the test of Biblical Numerics to the reference; for it takes hours of time and careful work to test a passage by Biblical Numerics. If we were to test by Biblical Numerics every passage that we quote and explain, which to doubt we see no ground, all our time would be spent on Biblical Numerics, which would make us do a Gershonite Amramite work as a text recensionist, and we would not be able to do our Priestly work. Hence when we do not have a compelling reason to doubt the genuineness of a text, we cannot give our time to investigate its genuineness by Biblical Numerics. Up to about April, 1934, we had no compelling reason to begin to doubt the genuineness of the earthquake reference. The fact that certain events occurring after the earthquake reference were fulfilling, whereas the symbolic earthquake had not yet taken place either in America or in

 

357

Europe, which is to precede that in America, first raised doubts in our mind on the genuineness of the pertinent matter. But as there were yet six months until Oct., 1934, with the possibility that the time order in the antitype might be different from that in the type, we could not see our way clear to set aside the genuineness of the passage. Our being overcrowded with work prevented our examining the passage by Biblical Numerics before Nov. 25, 1934, a date 56 days after the limit for the antitypical earthquake to set in, if the passage had been genuine. These are the answers that we give to the question. Why did you not years ago examine the earthquake reference by Biblical Numerics?

 

(100) Therefore, dear brethren, under the circumstances given in the four preceding paragraphs, we do not blame ourself much for the mistake. Nor do we believe the Lord blames us much therefore. We believe the Lord permitted the mistake for the good of all of us, e.g., (1) to test the writer's humility as to whether he would honestly and openly acknowledge the mistake, his faith in the general situation and his endurance of the large thief's "false prophet" shouts; (2) to test the humility, faith and endurance of the Epiphany brethren in the same ways; and (3) to manifest the unfaithful among them and among the various Levite groups. Let us, beloved brethren, stand faithfully under these tests. Let us not be like the large impenitent thief—closing our eyes to the surpassingly beautiful picture the Lord has painted for us in the large six wonderful days already finished, and seeing only a lone fly speck instead! Let us not by this little mistake reject or doubt the Epiphany message, for which the Lord has given us so many proofs, among which are the fulfilled facts of the small eight wonderful days and of six of the large eight wonderful days, in the first set of which the forecasts for the sixth, seventh and eighth days were wonderfully

 

358

fulfilled, and in the second set of which the same is true of those of the sixth. After all, beloved brethren, it is the heart's attitude that mainly counts with, and that is being tested by the Lord, rather than the infallibility of our heads, which in all of us are fallible. Let us also from this experience learn that as a part of the mother of the daughter, the Epiphany messenger as a servant of the Great-Company-developing Truth, is not to be entirely cleansed from error until 1954, and that until then gradually will his purification be accomplished. This will help keep us from stumbling at any mistake he may make, which will not be on any vital matter, and will bring us increasingly the blessings that the Lord will minister to us through His labors and prayers for us. Nor should we leave our subject without thanks to the Lord for purifying all of us from the mistake as to the earthquake reference in Matt. 27: 51, 54; and above all in this connection let us praise, worship and adore the Lord for His gracious light on the detailed clearness that He has given us on the multitudinous antitypes of the small eight wonderful days and of six  of the large eight wonderful days, particularly on those of the large sixth wonderful day!

 

(101) In this connection arises the following interesting question: Since the twelfth hour of the sixth large wonderful day ended in October [1934] why did not the earthquake antitypical of Matt. 27: 51, 54 take the place before October [written in Nov., 1934] To this we answer: The reference to the earthquake in vs. 51, 54 has been proven to be an interpolation, and therefore could have no antitype. For years we have known that vs. 52, 53 were interpolations. Please see Comment. Our Pastor held that vs. 52, 53 were interpolations, because they taught false doctrines, e.g., that the bodies of the dead return (1 Cor. 15: 35), that the Ancient Worthies are saints, which only the Gospel-Age Faithful are, that cast-off Jerusalem

 

359

was the holy city. The following absurdities also appear in these verses: that those alleged saints remained in their open graves alive for three days before coming out and showing themselves; that they appeared to many Jerusalemites, whereas Jesus would show Himself to none because of their unbelief; that they were recognized, whereas no one could know most of them, never having seen many, if any, of the Ancient Worthies before. Again, against their genuineness our Pastor held the fact that so tremendous a thing as is set forth in vs. 52, 53 would have been mentioned by Mark, Luke and John, who narrate much less important things in common with Matthew. The doctrinal and unreasonable considerations that hold against the genuineness of vs. 52, 53 do not hold against the reference to the earth quaking and the rocks rending in vs. 51, 54. The silence of the other three Evangelists is the only reason against the genuineness of vs. 52, 53 that holds against the genuineness of the earthquake of vs. 51, 54. It was for this reason that we for years held that this was also possibly an interpolation and expressed this possibility to Bros. Jolly, Danielsen and some other leading brethren; but did not feel that the genuineness of the statement could be successfully impugned on the ground of its being just a possibility. Hence we had to wait for the event, which, everything else in the type fulfilling on time, and it failing, arouses strong suspicion of the ungenuineness of the two pertinent clauses of v. 51—"the earth did quake and the rocks rent"—and the words of v. 54—"the earthquake and" to be interpolations. We did not base the thought of the earthquake's coming in America before October on any other thing than these two clauses. These being interpolations, which however we could not of certainty know before the event, of course, there could not be an antitype of their statements; and the thought based on them as types; i.e., that the

 

360

earthquake would occur in America by October has proven to be a mistake. At least we can get this much good out of the experience—the knowledge that the pertinent parts of vs. 51, 54 are interpolations.

 

(102) Like letters of the Latin alphabet, the letters of the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic alphabets have not only sound, but also number values. Thus the first letter of the alphabets of these languages stands for 1, the second for 2, the third for 3, etc. This same phenomenon occurs in other, especially Semitic, languages. This results in every Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic word standing not only for an idea, but for a number, which is the sum of the numeric values of its component letters. Accordingly, every word in the Hebrew and Aramaic of the Old Testament and every word of the Greek of the New Testament stands not only for an idea, but also for a number, which is the sum of the numeric values of its component letters. God, knowing this, has constructed the sentences of the Bible in its original languages in such a way as, among other numeric multiples, to make the sum of the numeric value of their words multiples of the number 7. This same principle of the occurrence of the number 7 is often used apart from the numeric values of letters, e.g., the number 7 underlies the whole book of Revelation, not only in the numeric values of its sentences, but of its visions and of the objects treated in its visions, e.g., 7 churches, 7 stars, 7 spirits (teachings), 7 horns and 7 eyes (of the Lamb), 7 seals, 7 trumpets, 7 vials, etc. In fact there is a sevenfold picture given of each general vision of that book. Thus the number 7 underlies it.

 

(103) Another example of the use of sevens is in the genealogy given in Matt. 1, which helps to overcome one of the difficulties of the genealogy. In this genealogy there is a threefold mention of 14 generations, thus a threefold occurrence of 14, i.e., a total of 42, which is a multiple of 7. Actually this genealogy

 

361

omits the names of three of Jesus' ancestors. Why is this done? Did God make a mistake therein? Assuredly not! Why then was it done? To give us a clue on the structure of the Bible as consisting of numerics, especially of the numerics of 7, which God worked into this feature of Matt. 1, even to the extent of abbreviating the genealogy to work the multiple of 7 into the genealogy. Accordingly, Bible sentences consist of words the sum total of whose numeric values in their letters is a multiple of 7. And when these values in our present manuscripts are not a multiple of 7, there has some change occurred from what the sentence was as originally given by God. This change may be in the omission of letters or of words, or of phrases, or of clauses, or of sentences, or it may be in the addition thereof. Hence Biblical numerics furnishes us a fine criterion whereby we can determine whether a letter, a word, a phrase, a clause or a sentence as it stands in our present Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek Biblical manuscripts is genuine, in whole or in part, or which reading is genuine when there are variant readings in the manuscripts. The celebrated interpolation in 1 John 5: 7 on the three that bear witness in heaven under the test of Biblical numerics breaks down. So does every other interpolation in our Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts of the Bible. The failure of the American Armageddon to set in before Oct., 1934, while every other feature of the first six of the eight large wonderful days did fulfill before that date, moved us to examine Matt. 27: 51-54 by the numerics of 7 and we find thereby that the references to the earthquake and the rent rocks in vs. 51 and 54 and the entirety of vs. 52 and 53 to be interpolations. Hence, of course, the involved type as God gave it did not contain the reference to the earth quaking and the rocks rending, etc., and therefore did not refer to the American Armageddon, which, accordingly, the inspired type did not teach would occur during the sixth large wonderful

 

362

day, but which, accepting as genuine the involved words of vs. 51, 54, we had set forth in the picture of the sixth large wonderful day as to come before Oct., 1934.

 

(104) Above proofs were given that the last two clauses of Matt. 27: 51 and the whole of vs. 52 and 53 and part of v. 54 were interpolations. Hence we give in this article the proof of the same thing from the standpoint of Biblical numerics. We will quote the entire section from the I.V., italicizing and bracketing the interpolated words: (51) "And, lo, the vail of the temple was rent into two [parts]; [and the earth was shaken, and the rocks were rent, (52) and the graves were opened, and many bodies of the saints that have slept were raised; (53) and after coming forth out of the tombs, after his rising, they entered into the holy city and appeared to many;] (54) but the centurion and those with him guarding Jesus, after seeing [the earthquake and] the things that happened, were greatly affrighted, saying, Truly this was God's Son." We first added all the numeric value of all the words as they occur in the Greek of the entire passage above quoted. They totaled 39,506, which divided by 7 = 5,643 5/7. This showed that there was something wrong with the passage as it now stands in the Greek. We then added the numeric value of the suspected words and found that they totaled 18,583. This we divided by 7, getting as a result, 2,654 5/7. Both results being 5/7 out of line, we knew, before we divided them, that the numeric value of the unsuspected words were divisible by 7. The numeric value of the unsuspected words is 20,923, which divided by 7 = 2,989. This, again, divided by 7 = 427, which in turn divided by 7 = 61. Thus the unsuspected words are not only a multiple of 7, but a multiple of 7 x 7 x 7. This is trebly convincing.

 

(105) To test this result by the other possibilities of the situation, we decided to work on them further.