A SUMMARY ON THE GREAT COMPANY'S GENERALITIES. SOME DETAILS ON THE GREAT COMPANY'S GENERALITIES. PURIFICATION OF THE TRUTH AND ITS SERVANTS (LEV. 12). THE MOTHER OF A SON. THE MOTHER OF A DAUGHTER. SOME LESSONS. JULIAN T. GRAY'S VIEW. HUGO KARLEN'S VIEW. SOME QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON THE GREAT COMPANY. BEREAN QUESTIONS. 

‍

HAVING made a fairly detailed study of the Epiphany in its twofold meanings, especially in that of it as a period, we now come to the study of the first of its elect classes, the Great Company, treating first of the Great Company's generalities, then of its details. We will first give a summary, then some details on the generalities of the Great Company. This class is called in Joel 2:29 "the handmaids," and a Great Multitude in Rev. 7:9; 19:6 [the same two Greek words are in the A.V. translated, "much people," but should have been rendered, Great Multitude]. The individuals of this class were originally invited through the High Calling to the Divine nature and joint-heirship with Christ (2 Pet. 1:4; Rom. 8:17; Eph. 4:4); but, alas, they failed to keep faithfully their consecration vows, and have had, therefore, to be remanded to a secondary class. These have in practice rebelled or supported rebels against more or less of the teachings and arrangements of God's Word (Ps. 107:10, 11). They have by sin marred their characters and spotted their robes (1 Cor. 5:1-13; Jude 23; Rev. 7:14). They have failed faithfully to sacrifice their humanity for God (Heb. 2:15; Jude 22). They have fellowshipped with the world (2 Tim. 4:10; Jas. 1:8). They have accepted and spread various false doctrines (1 Cor. 3:12, 15; Matt. 25:3, 8). They have developed sectarian systems (1 Cor. 3:3, 4; Matt. 7:26; 1 Tim. 1:19, 20). They have usurped the office and 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

88 

persecuted the persons of their faithful brethren (Is. 66:5). They have more or less served Satan (Heb. 2:14, 15). They will receive from him the destruction of their flesh and works (1 Cor. 5:5; 1 Tim. 1:20; Matt. 7:27; 1 Cor. 3:15); but they will finally escape with their lives, after losing the prize of the High Calling (1 Cor. 3:15; Heb. 2:15; Jude 22, 23; Phil. 3:14). Accordingly, they will meet a great disappointment, when they learn that they have lost the Divine nature and joint-heirship with Christ (Cant. 5:6, 7; Matt. 25:11, 12, 30). This consideration, combined with the thought that they will be lost unless they repent, will lead them to cleanse themselves (Rev. 7:14). Thereafter they will have a successful ministry (Cant. 5:9—6:1; Rev. 19:6); and will in Heaven attain a subordinate spiritual glory (Ps. 45:14, 15; 1 Cor. 5:5; Rev. 19:9). As parts of the Firstborn they will be Levites in God's Temple and Noblemen in God's Kingdom (Heb. 12:23; Rev. 7:15; Ezek. 44:10-14). Many members of this class are just now, at the end of the Age, coming into special notice, activity and prominence. This class and the Little Flock, it will be noticed, are developed during the Gospel Age ("in those days," Joel 2:29) in which Jesus and the Apostles labored, in which the great Apostasy developed, and in which—at its end—the Lord restored the primitive teachings and practices of Christianity. 

(2) In general God's Plan treats of two classes, a heavenly class and an earthly class; an Elect class and a non-elect class; Jesus and the Church, His Bride, as the Elect class, and the world of mankind as the non-elect class. It is impossible clearly to understand the Scriptures without understanding the distinction between these two classes. We may speak of the distinction between them as a primary lesson in Biblical knowledge (2 Tim. 2:15); and, of course, this distinction must be kept in mind to help us understand 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

89 

various details given in the Scriptures. The Bible contrasts these two classes in many ways of which the following are a few: Each class has its respective call, one limited, the other general (1 Cor. 1:26-29; John 12:32); there are two ways for them to travel, one the "narrow way," the other the "highway" (Matt. 7:14; Is. 35:8); there are two sets of conditions, one difficult, the other easy, amid which they are developed (2 Tim. 3:12; Is. 25:8); a different set of promises pertains to each of them—one heavenly, the other earthly (Heb. 10:32-34; Amos 9:14, 15). Two different abodes will be their eternal home, one the new heavens, the other the new earth (2 Pet. 3:13; Rev. 21:1); each is to share in a different resurrection—one of the just, the other of the unjust (John 5:28, 29, A.R.V.; Acts 24:15). And each will receive a different nature as a reward of faithfulness, one Divine, the other human (2 Pet. 1:4; Is. 65:16-25). 

(3) But, according to God's Word, these are not the only classes for whom there is salvation provided; for the Scriptures speak of other classes than these who will ultimately attain eternal life. Of one of these other classes our text treats under the term, "a Great Multitude," usually called the Great Company. Of this class this and the following two chapters will treat. We are not to understand that during the Gospel Age God has been calling two classes to salvation; for the record is: "Ye are all called in the one hope of your calling" (Eph. 4:4); that is, we are not to understand that God has been offering two sets of people two different salvations during the Gospel Age, as inducements for them to serve Him; for such a thing is nowhere taught in the Bible. Rather, there has been only one actual salvation offered to those who turn from sin to righteousness, from Satan to God, during the present Age. To these God has offered as the prize (Phil. 3:14) the Divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4), and joint-heirship with Christ (Rom. 8:17), 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

90 

on condition of faithfulness unto death (Rev. 2:10). How then, one may ask, does another class obtain salvation during this Age? We answer that the majority of those who hear and accept the Lord's invitation to consecrate their humanity to death in His service, and to develop heavenly hearts and minds (Rom. 12:1, 2), fail so to run as to obtain the prize of the Divine nature and joint-heirship with Christ; rather as respects the prize they become castaways (1 Cor. 9:24-27), because they do not prove "more than conquerors" of sin, error, selfishness or worldliness, by which through unfaithfulness they became defiled. Yet they do not wholly give up the Lord and righteousness; rather, for awhile they are double-minded—partly for the Lord, and partly for self, the adversary and the world (Jas. 1:8; 3:15). Later by a penitent, believing and obedient use of the Lord's grace exercised through His Word and providence they are recovered; and changing their course become zealous for the Lord and His cause, and finally overcome (1 Cor. 5:5; 3:15; Jude 22, 23). These, of course, by their double-dealing fail to qualify for the Bride of Christ; and their condition would be pitiable indeed, unless the Lord should arrange some other salvation for them. This in His compassion He has done, without having invited them to such a salvation, when He first called them by the Gospel. He proposes to make them Bridesmaids for the Lamb's Wife, by inviting them as a class for the first time at the end of the Gospel Age to be present as guests at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb (Rev. 19:9); and the record is that many will avail themselves of this privilege, and will then have white robes, i.e., pure characters, and be granted palms, i.e., victory (Rev. 7:9). 

(4) The possibility of there being such a class lies in the fact that it is possible to lose the prize of the High Calling. Scriptural teachings are to the effect that one can fall from the High Calling (1 Cor. 9:24-27; 2 Tim. 2:5; 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

91 

Jas. 5:19, 20; Rev. 3:11); Scriptural exhortations imply the same thing (Heb. 2:1-3; 3:12-14; 4:1, 11); Scriptural examples prove the same fact (Rev. 2:5; 2 John 8; 2 Tim. 4:10); and the sin unto death is in line with the same thought (Heb. 6:4-6; 10:26-31; 2 Pet. 2:20-22; 1 John 5:16; Jude 4-19). The last line of thought even proves that one can fall so far as to lose eternal life altogether; and, of course, therefore, one could lose the special prize of the High Calling. If all were of the second death class who lose the prize of the High Calling, of course there could be no opportunity for one to be of the Great Company. But some being saved through various punishments (1 Cor. 3:15) proves another than the High Calling salvation. The fact, then, that there is a Great Company proves that some fall from the Little Flock without sinking into the second death class. The Great Company consists of those who are not sufficiently faithful to be of the Bride of Christ, but faithful enough to keep out of the second death. They are not good enough to be Kings and Priests with Christ (Rev. 20:4-6); but are good enough to be Nobles and Levites (Rev. 7:9, 14, 15), and are too good to be destroyed in the second death. 

(5) The individuals of this class at their consecration and Spirit-begettal started out as prospective members of Christ (Eph. 4:4; Heb. 3:14); for they heard and heeded the invitation to exercise repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus (Acts 20:21), and accepted the invitation to consecrate themselves as living sacrifices to God (Rom. 12:1; Prov. 23:26). Their failing to gain the prize has not been due to the Lord's not loving and helping them sufficiently; for He loves and helps especially all that truly give themselves, and most especially those who continue loyal to Him (John 14:21-23); but it has been due to the fact that they forgot their "first love" by which they for awhile kept the Lord's Word

The Epiphany's Elect. 

92 

(John 14:15; Rev. 2:4). They received the Lord's Spirit of sonship when they complied with the conditions of justification and consecration (John 14:15, 16; Rom. 5:1, 2; 6:3; 8:10; 1 Cor. 12:12, 13; Gal. 3:26, 27; 2 Cor. 5:17). The Lord sent them, as well as the Faithful, abundant instructions, encouragements, exhortations, warnings, rebukes, disciplines and corrections to deter them from a wrong course (Heb. 12:5-13; Rev. 3:19); and their taking the wrong course was entirely due to their failing to watch, to pray and to keep themselves in the love of God sufficiently to carry out their consecration, and thus to remain standing in His special favor (Matt. 26:41; Jude 21), as prospective members of the Bride. There have been such measurably unfaithful brethren throughout the entire Gospel Age (1 Cor. 5:1-5; Jude 22, 23; Matt. 7:26, 27; 13:7, 25, comp. Luke 8:14; 1 Tim. 1:19; 3 John 9, 10). 

(6) Their course toward the Lord, the Truth and the remainder of the Lord's people has not been a praiseworthy one. But not all of them have been equally guilty of wrong-doing. Some of them have been nearly faithful enough to be of the Bride; and some of them have been nearly unfaithful enough to be of the second death class (Jude 22, 23). Between these two extremes of character in these brethren there have been and are now all sorts of variations of double-mindedness. With some of these bound children of God the trouble has been not so much a turning to sin as a failure to sacrifice unto death, through fear of the sacrificial death (Heb. 2:15). Unlike the Master (Heb. 12:2, 3), they do not endure the cross and despise the shame. Others of them, in addition to failing to sacrifice self and the world, give themselves up to various sins, and serve the adversary through spreading errors of doctrine and practice in religious matters, thereby spotting their garments, as the passages quoted at the end of the preceding paragraph prove. Altogether 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

93 

as a class they are more or less wayward and self-willed, instead of being obedient and surrendered to the Lord's will. Thus they fail both with respect to their justification and consecration privileges and duties. 

(7) This condition, of course, unfits them for the position of Kings and Priests, their characters not being of so good a quality as that required for Kings and Priests of God. How could God give the Divine nature to those who rebel and support rebels (Ps. 107:10, 11) against His ways? How could He make them of the Bride of His Son when they defile the bridal garments of holy characters? (1 Cor. 5:1-13; Jude 23). How could He proclaim them "more than conquerors" (Rom. 8:37), when they compromise with the enemy through fear of the sacrificial death? (Heb. 2:15). How can He give those the best that Heaven affords whose hearts cleave to the world? (2 Pet. 2:7, 8; 2 Tim. 4:10; Jas. 1:8). How can He make them of the Christ-Body, from which the rivers of living waters will flow (John 7:37, 38; Rev. 22:1, 2), in view of the fact that through false teachings they corrupted the wells of Truth? (John 4:14; 1 Cor. 3:12-15). How could He make them parts of the Temple of God (Rev. 21:3; Eph. 2:20-22; 1 Pet. 2:5) who have developed the false religious systems during this life? (1 Cor. 3:3, 4; Matt. 7:26, 27; 1 Tim. 1:19, 20). How could He make them His most honored ones, since they dishonored the faithful ones? (Is. 66:5). Surely it is unreasonable that He should treat the measurably Faithful as He will treat the thoroughly Faithful. Neither Reason nor Scripture warrants such a thought. The Faithful are guided by His eye, i.e., they are directed in their life by His Word of Wisdom, the Truth; while the measurably Faithful must be repeatedly chastised, and finally have their fleshly mind entirely destroyed by punishments received at Satan's hands, who, while using them for his purposes, greatly 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

94 

mistreats them (1 Cor. 5:5; 1 Tim. 1:19, 20). In every case that which they made "the stumbling block of their iniquity" becomes the means of their punishment: The favor of the world that they crave they lose; the pleasure of self-indulgence for which they pine turns into ashes grating on their teeth; the sin that they fondle turns into a poisonous reptile, greatly plaguing them by the venom of its sharp fangs; and the errors that they cherish leave their hearts cold and weak and their heads confused and deceived. In life's experiences they are continually meeting contrarieties that make their efforts fruitless. They lose one cherished thing after another, until there is nothing of self and of the world left for them. Thus their flesh gradually undergoes an enforced destruction at Satan's hands (Matt. 7:27; 1 Cor. 3:15; 1 Tim. 1:19, 20), while the flesh of the Faithful is gradually consumed in loving and fruitful sacrifices for the Lord's cause (Phil. 4:18; Heb. 13:12-16; 6:10; 10:32-34). 

(8) Throughout the Gospel Age there have been consecrated individuals, as evidenced by the Scriptures (1 Cor. 5:5; 1 Tim. 1:19, 20) and experience, who have pursued the double-minded course of the Great Company, and as a result have had to undergo the above-described enforced destruction of their flesh, instead of having the privilege of sacrificing it completely in loving, willing service of the Lord, the Truth and the Brethren. But, according to many Scriptures, these are first treated as a class at the end of this Age. Among other proofs the Tabernacle has no place for their existence as a class until the Epiphany. For they are not as a class of new creatures in the Holy (priests) nor in the Court (justified) nor in the Camp (unjustified) during the Gospel Age. First during the Epiphany do they take their place in the Court. In our times there are more such people than ever before; and the Lord is now dealing especially with them as a class. Among other passages, this class is described in the

Generalities on the Great Company. 

95 

fifth chapter of Canticles—the Song of Solomon. Through the Word of Truth the Bridegroom there calls them away from their ways; but they, the foolish virgin, sleep spiritually, and make excuse for not fully yielding themselves to the Heavenly Bridegroom, as He calls them away from their course. When at long last they do give a tardy response, they will find a disappointment in store for them; for then Brideship will have been lost to them (Matt. 25:8-12). They will be mistreated by the figurative watchmen, the clergy, when they begin to witness to the Truth, as their opening eyes will reveal it to them. They will become zealous for the Lord according to the Truth as against the creeds, proclaiming Him especially to the Israelites (Cant. 5:8—6:3), whom as a nation they will have the privilege of converting to Christ. They must pass through "the great tribulation," amid which they will cleanse their robes and make them white in the blood of the Lamb (Rev. 7:14). Amid this great tribulation it will be their blessed privilege to proclaim the glorious message, "Hallelujah! for the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth!" Despite their sorrows and sufferings incidental to the destruction of their flesh and their cleansing themselves, they will rejoice through their tears that the Bride, the Lamb's Wife, will have been completed in holiness and in number, and will proclaim Her glorification with Her Lord (Rev. 19:6-8). Their spirits, new creatures, will be saved in the Day of the Lord Jesus (1 Cor. 5:5; 2 Cor. 5:17). They with joy will in heaven partake as bridesmaids at the marriage supper of the Lamb (Rev. 19:9; Ps. 45:14, 15). And, being then spirit beings like the angels, they will be privileged to serve the Lord in His Temple, i.e., as Levites (Rev. 7:15); while Jesus and the faithful Church will be the living stones of the Temple, and Priests (Rev. 1:6; 5:10; 20:6). The trials and tribulations of these Levites will be a thing of the past, and God's eternal favor will be theirs, on a plane of 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

96 

being lower than that of the Bride (Rev. 7:15-17). Thus through the grace and mercy of God these wayward brethren having been brought to repentance, "shall be saved, yet so as by fire," after suffering the loss of the prize—the Divine nature and joint-heirship with Christ, which the Faithful obtain (1 Cor. 3:14, 15; Rev. 3:11). 

(9) We herewith present in two groups for the study of our dear readers some of the more important Scriptures that treat of the Great Company. In the light of the foregoing we trust that these Scriptures will be clear, and that their study will prove a blessing to all. The first group contains such passages as treat of the Great Company alone; and the second group contains such passages as treat of the Little Flock and the Great Company together. (1) Ps. 107:10-16; Cant. 5:1—6:3; Jer. 8:20; 1 Cor. 5:1-13; 1 Tim. 1:19, 20; Heb. 2:15; Jas. 1:8; 4:1-10; 5:19, 20; Jude 22, 23; Rev. 7:9-17; 19:1-9; (2) Ps. 45:14, 15; Is. 66:5-9; Mal. 3:2-4; Matt. 7:24-27; 10:32-39; 13:7, 8, 22, 23; 16:24-27; 25:1-12; 25:14-30; 1 Cor. 3:12-15; 1 Pet. 4:14-18. 

(10) After carefully studying these Scriptures let each one of us examine himself in their light to discern, if possible, whether he is a New Creature; and if so, to which of these two classes of new creatures he belongs. These are questions of utmost importance for every New Creature. Properly to learn their answers requires wisdom from above, which the Giver of every good gift and of every perfect gift will bestow liberally without upbraiding upon all who ask for it aright. If any of our readers desire information on this subject or other Biblical subjects and will ask us for it, we will be glad to give it as best we can. 

(11) Frequently from 1918 onward we have been asked to explain the antitypical significance of Lev. 12, and as frequently, until 1928, we had been compelled to tell the questioners that we did not understand 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

97 

its antitype. The time evidently was not due to use the passage in its antitypical significance with sufficient effectiveness against errors on the part of the Levite leaders as to the Truth that develops the Little Flock; and therefore for practical reasons the Lord withheld its understanding until 1928. Doubtless the great increase of error among the Levites against the Little Flock's Truth moved the Lord to give the Truth on Lev. 12 as a means of vindicating that Truth as reliable in the form in which it was left by our dear Pastor; for, rightly understood, the antitype of this chapter proves that when our Pastor left us he left with us the Truth that develops the Little Flock, purified from all error and thus fit to be relied upon as a finished product, as well as a proper foundation for the Epiphany Truth. We therefore ask our readers to peruse Lev. 12 before going further in the study of this chapter. 

(12) We got the key to Lev. 12 from the typical significance of Rachel, Jacob's favorite wife. We have shown elsewhere that for our time she types the Parousia and the Epiphany truths and the servants who minister these to the two classes especially developed by these in the end of this Age (P '23, 117, par. 5; 118, par. 1). Or, to put it in other words, Rachel represents the spiritual elective truths and their servants that combinedly develop the Little Flock and the Great Company, especially in the end of the Age. In defining Rachel's Gospel-Age significance in the above citation we said that she typed real Spiritual Israel and their promises. This is true enough for the whole Gospel Age, but is not quite specific enough when viewed in relation to her giving birth to her sons, Joseph and Benjamin. The more specific definition for her in this relation is the Parousia and Epiphany or the spiritual elective Truth and the servants who apply it to the development of the Little Flock and the Great Company. But one may ask, Was not Jacob

The Epiphany's Elect. 

98 

the type of the servants who apply such Truth to these two classes? We answer that Jacob types the Truth servants in their capacity of starting the antitypical Joseph and Benjamin movements, but those servants who nourished these after they were thus started are represented in the type by Rachel, even as the mother nourishes and develops her children, after the father begets them and after the mother brings them to birth. Hence the mother in Lev. 12, we understand, types the same thing as Rachel does in the end of the Age. Vs. 6-8 prove that the servants that have applied the Truth for the development of the two spiritual classes in the end of the Age are also involved in the antitype of this woman; because no atonement is made for the Truth; but atonement is made for the shortcomings of its servants, because they need it. 

(13) We have previously pointed out that the Little Flock is sometimes typed by a male child, and the Great Company by a female child, when the two classes are contrasted; even as Little Flock members are spoken of as Jehovah's sons (John 1:12; 1 John 3:1, 2), while Great Company members are spoken of as Jehovah's daughters and as His maidservants (2 Cor. 6:18; Joel 2:29). Aaron and Miriam (Num. 12:1-16) may be cited as proofs of this fact, as given in the types. Accordingly, we understand the male child of Lev. 12:2 to represent the Little Flock in the Parousia, and the female child of Lev. 12:5 to represent the Great Company in the Parousia and in the Epiphany. A comparative type showing the two classes together in these periods is that of Elijah and Elisha coming together to Gilgal (1874), Bethel (1878), Jericho (1881), Jordan (1914) and beyond Jordan (1916-1917) (Z '15, 286, pars. 6-12). It is to be noted that in the case of the birth of a son 40 days were required for the full purifying of the mother (Lev. 12:2, 4; compare with Luke 2:21-24), while 80 days were required for the full purification 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

99 

of the mother in the case of a daughter's birth (Lev. 12:5). We understand the 40 days' period for the purifying of the mother after the birth of a son to represent the 40 years of the Parousia (1874-1914). The purifying of the mother during those 40 days types two things: (1) the ridding of the Truth (in its application to the Little Flock—the male child) of all error attaching to it; and (2) the purifying of its faithful servants, so that it was proven by October, 1914, that they had retained their crowns and therefore henceforth would retain them. Further, we understand the 80 days' period for the purifying of the mother after the birth of a daughter to represent the 80 years of the Parousia and Epiphany combined (1874-1914 plus 1914-1954). The purifying of the mother during these 80 days types two things: (1) the ridding of the Truth (in its application to the Great Company, etc.) of all error attaching to it; and (2) the purifying of the faithful and measurably faithful servants of the Truth of such defilements as would unfit them for their place in the Millennial Age, as well as for a special attestatorial service from October, 1954, onward. 

(14) It will be noted that facts prove that both crown-retaining and crown-losing servants have ministered, are ministering and will yet minister both of these kinds of Truth throughout these periods, and that to both classes. But in the type of the mother's seven days' uncleanness (v. 2) it is to be considered that the participation of the crown-losing servants in the picture as related to the developers of the Little Flock is excluded, though they served in helping the Little Flock's development. Both crown-retaining and crown-losing servants are also to be considered as implied in the type of the mother in the picture as related to the developers of the Great Company, though the former are not included in the picture of the mother's fourteen days' uncleanness (v. 5). The 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

100 

facts of the two antitypes and the two periods of the typical uncleanness and of the typical purification force us to make this distinction in the viewpoint. In both cases, in the first antitypical meaning of the mother—the Truth—the full purification of the pertinent Truth is to be understood as typed by the full purification of the pertinent mother. And in both cases, in the progressiveness of the cleansing, the gradual ridding of the pertinent Truth from errors attaching to it, is meant. The purifying work in both of its senses, i.e., as respects the Truth and as respects its servants, is expressly shown to be the Parousia and Epiphany work of our Lord in His Second Advent (Mal. 3:2, 3; 1 Cor. 3:12-15; Matt. 7:24-27; 2 Tim. 4:1); and its gradualness, so far as its Truth cleansing feature is concerned, is taught in Prov. 4:18. 

(15) We do not know yet in connection with what particular work the antitypical mother of the antitypical daughter in the sense of the servants of the Truth will in 1954 bring the antitypical burnt offering and sin offering in attestation of her purification; but we opine it will take the force of converting Israel. We will doubtless have to wait until about that time for certainty as to this knowledge. But we do know in connection with what work the purification of the mother in the sense of the crown-retaining servants as completed was attested, and, therefore, in connection with what work her antitypical burnt offering and sin offering were brought,—the service that we variously call the smiting of Jordan, antitypical Gideon's First Battle, the confessing of antitypical Israel's sins over Azazel's Goat and the executing of the judgment written, with the binding of the kings and princes. That service attested the purification of the antitypical mother; for faithful participation in it proved the crown-retaining servants to be such. Yet their service therein did not merit for them the high calling. This is proved by the fact that they had to bring the antitype 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

101 

of the mother's burnt offering and sin offering (Lev. 12:6-8). God's blessings on the Church as a result of the merit of Christ as the proof that God regards Jesus' sacrifice as acceptable were the antitype of the burnt offering that the mother of a son brought; and the amount of Jesus' merit needed to cover the sins of the Truth servants was the antitype of the sin offering that the mother of a son brought. The mother's bringing the burnt offering and the sin offering to the priest types the faith of the pertinent servants in the antitypical burnt offering and sin offering of Christ and the priest's offering these to Jehovah types our High Priest manifesting Jehovah's acceptance of Jesus' sacrifice for the faithful Truth servants in the above-mentioned services and securing God's forgiveness for their unwilling blemishes through His all-prevailing merit. The pigeon or turtle dove offered as the sin offering, and not a bullock, seems to type the fact that not all of Christ's merit, but only enough of it to cover the sins of the antitypical individuals involved was imputed; while the varying value in the burnt offerings—a lamb on the one hand, or a pigeon or turtle dove on the other—seems to imply the thought that more of God's blessings as His manifestation of His acceptance of Christ's merit is given to some than to others of God's servants. Poverty-afflicted Mary bringing the pigeon or turtle dove as her burnt offering (Luke 2:24) implies, therefore, that she typed such crown-retaining servants as did not get so much of God's blessings as His manifestation of His acceptance of our Lord's merit as others did. A bringer of a lamb would type those who got more blessings in the antitypical burnt offering, e.g., our Pastor, Bro. Barton, etc., as faithful Truth servants received more of God's blessings as attesting His acceptance of Jesus' sacrifice than some of the other faithful Truth servants received through Jesus' ministry. 

(16) It will be noted that in the case of bearing a

The Epiphany's Elect. 

102 

son the mother was considered as in the usual uncleanness (v. 2) coming through the menses (Lev. 15:19-28), for a period of seven days; while in the case of bearing a daughter she was considered as in uncleanness for fourteen days, as though of a double menses. A study of Lev. 15:19-28 makes us think that the following is the antitype: As there will be for the race full seven 1,000-years days before it is clean from the defilements of Adamic sin, so the Faithful through their faith justification are reckoned as having lived through these antitypical seven days and having gotten the complete cleansing from Adamic uncleanness at their end. And by that one imputation of Christ's merit at Pentecost (Heb. 10:14) they are forever regarded as freed from the Adamic uncleanness. But not so the crown-losing servants of the Great Company Truth, who in the antitype of the 14 days' uncleanness alone are involved, the faithful crown-retainers being ignored in the type from this part of the antitype; even as reversely the crown-losing servants of the Little Flock Truth are ignored in the antitypical seven days' uncleanness of the faithful servants of the Little Flock Truth, as set forth in the type. These crown-losing servants had a part in the first cleansing (typed by the first seven of the fourteen days of uncleanness) (v. 5), but because of their measurable unfaithfulness they must as a class go through another cleansing, in which the merit of Jesus will be specially used (Num. 8:12, 21). This second atonement for them is implied in the second set of the seven days in the fourteen, as set forth in v. 5. This second imputation set in some time between October, 1923, and October, 1924, at the presentation of the first part of the Good Levites—the second of the antitypical wave loaves in the finished picture. It is especially the statements of vs. 2 and 5 that made us say above that the crown-retaining servants are excluded from the type of the fourteen days' uncleanness and the 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

103 

crown-losing servants are excluded from the type of the seven days' uncleanness. Perhaps the 33 days of v. 4 (33 being a combination and multiple of 3, which is symbolic of good) refer to the faithful servants in their goodness; while the 66 days (66 being a combination and multiple of 6, which is symbolic of evil and imperfection) are perhaps introduced to call attention to evils and imperfections in crown-losing servants. 

(17) The above study suggests several lessons that may well be here emphasized. The first of these is this: The 40 days of the purification for a mother of a son proves that the Parousia—the Reaping time—is a period of 40 years; and the 80 days of the purification for a mother of a daughter proves that the Parousia and the Epiphany total 80 years, and that accordingly the Epiphany is a period of 40 years. These periods are proved to be of equal length and of 40 years each by the following facts: (1) they are in the same connections together called days and each in the same connection is called a day, combined with the fact that the Parousia is repeatedly spoken of as 40 years; (2) the twofold stay of Moses for 40 days in the mountain; (3) the period of 40 years for each being required in order to have a full symbolic night from October, 1799, to October, 1954, with April, 1877, as its exact midnight, as required by the parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins; (4) 40 years seem to be the Bible period for trial along the line of certain principles, like the 40 years' trial in the wilderness, the 40 years' reigns of Saul, David and Solomon, as trial times, the 40 years of the Jewish Gospel and Millennial Age harvest trials; accordingly we would expect the Great Company and Youthful Worthies, as classes, similarly to have 40 years—the Epiphany—set aside as the special trial period along the lines of the principles applicable to them; (5) the Lord's use of twelve hours to the working 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

104 

day (John 11:9) and His providing in the parable of the Penny for an eventide and consequently a night to follow the day of reaping (Matt. 20:8), show that the symbolic twelve-hour night period that follows the Parousia time of Reaping (the twelve-hour day) must be of equal length, thus proving that the Epiphany is likewise 40 years long, the former being the day and the latter the night, referred to in Ps. 91:5, 6 and 121:6; (6) the Eight Large Wonderful Days, being eight decades, likewise show that the Parousia began in 1874 and that the Epiphany will end in 1954; and (7) now the 40 and 80 days of Lev. 12 are an additional proof. 

(18) A second lesson that we can learn from our study of Lev. 12 is in connection with a time feature and a future work—a period and a work of about two years and one month following the antitypical 80 days. We have seen from the study above that the time of sacrificing in attestation of the purification set in immediately after the completion of the 40 days, and that the sacrificing occurred in the antitype in connection with the smiting of Jordan, etc., a period of about two years and one month. This period we frequently have called an interlapping of the Parousia and the Epiphany. There being 13 lunar months in the lunar year which ended in the Spring of 1916, the period from September 20, 1914, to November 3, 1916—the period during which smiting lectures began and ended in Jordan's first smiting—was just about two years and one month lunar time. But there will, in antitype of the sacrifice after the 80 days' purification, set in a similar period and similar work, and as the typical sacrifices at the end of the 40 and 80 days are parallel it is quite probable that for about two years and one month there will be an interlapping of the Epiphany and the Basileia [Kingdom], during which there will be a service going on by the Great Company, similar in duration to that which went on for the 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

105 

Little Flock from September 20, 1914, to November 3, 1916, in Jordan's first smiting. This work will likely be that of the Great Company's converting Israel. 

(19) A third lesson is also taught by Lev. 12: The Truth that develops the Little Flock was clean from error by October, 1914. As the mother of a son was completely purified at the end of the 40 days, so the Truth needed for the development of the Little Flock, as distinct from the Truth needed for the development of the Great Company, was free from all error by October, 1914. This fact proves that the Little Flock Truth, i.e., the antitypical Parousia silver, as left by our Pastor with the Church, was refined from all the dross of error (Mal. 3:3, first clause). And this fact proves that the Levite leaders who have rejected Parousia teachings and have set other teachings in their place have rejected Truth and put in its place error. This shows how utterly false is the claim of that evil servant, that he is giving teachings, contradictory to Parousia teachings, as meat in due season which could not be seen by Bro. Russell, they being not yet due! On the contrary, the full purification of the mother of a son at the end of the 40 days proves that whatever is presented contrary to the teachings that developed the Little Flock as held by our Pastor at October, 1914, must be error, and therefore must be by Satan through his servants put forth as darkness for light. Whenever, therefore, the Levites, particularly the Channelites, tell us that their contradictions of the Parousia teachings as left by our Pastor at October, 1914, are as meat in due season truths that our Pastor could not see, they being not then due, let us tell them that this cannot be so, for the Parousia teachings as the symbolic silver were by October, 1914, purged from all the dross of error, even as the Lord's holy Word teaches (Lev. 12:3; Mal. 3:3). 

(20) A fourth lesson may well be drawn from our study of Lev. 12 and is implied in Mal 3:3, the first

The Epiphany's Elect. 

106 

clause: the gradual purging of the Truth from error during the Parousia and Epiphany until no error remains therein—the mother gradually undergoing purification as the 40 or 80 days progressed. God did not give all the Truth to that Servant at once; nor did He rid his teachings of all error at once. This was a gradual work from both standpoints, and we see it manifest in his setting aside from time to time some of his former understandings of Scriptural matters and putting correct views in their stead, e.g., the deliverance of the Church, the end of the trouble and the establishment of the Kingdom in Israel by October, 1914, the day of the Penny parable representing the Gospel Age, the pound representing the Holy Spirit, the New Covenant operating during the Gospel Age, etc., etc., etc. We should not by these previously misunderstood teachings be made to lose confidence in him as a Divinely appointed teacher; rather in the light of the teachings of the above-cited passages we should expect that he would make such corrections of former misunderstandings, until all such misunderstandings as to the teachings necessary for the development of the Little Flock were by October, 1914, set aside. Nor are we to expect him to have put aside all misunderstandings as to teachings necessary for the development of the Great Company; for the mother of a daughter was not purified until the end of the 80 days. Hence his uncertainty as to whether the Little Flock would be completely delivered before the dealings with Azazel's Goat would be begun and as to the length and purpose of the Church's stay in the world after 1914, his expecting antitypical Elijah to leave the world before antitypical Elisha would begin his ministry, the meaning of the midnight in the parable of the Ten Virgins, etc., etc.,—matters that are needed for the development of the Great Company in so far as they pertain to the Epiphany. 

(21) And the same principles apply to the Parousia-

Generalities on the Great Company. 

107 

Epiphany Truth (the Little Flock's part having been duly clarified) needed for the development of the Great Company. It has not all been made clear at once to and by the Epiphany messenger, nor have all his misunderstandings as to its details been removed at once. Both of these features of this work have been progressing and may be expected to progress as the Epiphany advances—as the antitypical mother of the Great Company advances toward 1954. This principle will account for a number of clarifications of immature, and the corrections of wrong understandings of some of its presentations and will doubtless account for future ones. But this should not shake our confidence in the Epiphany messages and its messenger. It should rather, while not making us lose confidence in it and him, move us to recognize the faithfulness of our Lord to Epiphany interests in His ministry of gradually burning the dross of error from the silver ore of Truth (Mal 3:3). Such a view of the matter will keep us back from either worshiping or depreciating messengers and will enable us, while using them for our help, always to look to and praise the Lord for the Truth; for, after all, He is the real source of the cleansed Truth (Mal. 3:3), and as such He deigns to use mouthpieces, not as lords over God's heritage, but as helpers of their faith, partners of their hope, inspirers of their love and patterns of their obedience. 

(22) In the August, 1932, Berean Bible Student, pp. 6, 7, is a letter from a "Faithful Berean," who signs himself J.T.G. (initials of Julian T. Gray) and who offers an exposition of Lev. 12. His thought is that the mother of the son is "Nominal Fleshly Zion," "the Jewish ecclesiastical system," the son is Jesus, the son's birth is Jesus' resurrection in 33 A.D., the 40 days of purifying are the 40 years from 33 to 73 A.D., the purifying of the mother of the son is Israel's expiation of her sins from 33 to 73 A.D.! He further claims that the mother of the daughter is the Nominal Church 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

108 

—"Nominal Spiritual Zion," the daughter is the true Church, Christ's body, its birth was the resurrection in 1878, the 80 days are the 80 years from 1878 to 1958, the purifying of the mother of the daughter is the Nominal Church's expiation of her sins for 80 years. This interpretation is a piece of error, for which the Lord holds the editor of the Berean Bible Student in part responsible, for giving it publicity. If he were a conscientious man, and disbelieved it, he would not have published it, or would have published it with refutative comments, which he did not do. In this his course is in marked contrast with that of our Pastor, who in every issue of the Tower gave the brethren to understand that his stewardship implied his preventing what he considered error from getting a hearing through the Tower. Of course, this article is published (see its third paragraph) as an attempted refutation of our interpretation, which, if correct, overthrows The Berean Bible Student's Harvest errors, allegedly based on our Pastor's article, The Harvest Is Not Ended. Let us look at the interpretation that The Berean Bible Student publishes as a letter of J.T.G., without correctional comment. 

(23) J.T.G.'s interpretation is all right with but one exception—and that is that in every detail it is wrong! This we will now proceed to show. In the type the mother of a son was gradually purified during 40 days and was entirely clean at the end of the 40 days, and on that 40th day offered through the priest an acceptable burnt-offering and sin-offering. In the antitype the sin-offering would represent Jesus' sacrifice and the burnt-offering God's manifested acceptance of it. The woman's bringing these sacrifices would represent the faith of the bringer in the antitypical burnt offering and sin-offering. Did Nominal Fleshly Zion in 73 A.D. accept Jesus in His sin and burnt offering; and did Jesus, the only Priest who could then make atonement, in 73 A.D. bring Nominal Fleshly Zion— 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

109 

Israel—into at-one-ment with God? None of these things has even yet happened. This one consideration would be sufficient to manifest the error of J.T.G.'s thought. But we will consider this interpretation further. Did Jesus, the new creature, at and by His resurrection come out of Nominal Fleshly Zion? Certainly not; for by His resurrection He, from one standpoint, came out of hades (Acts 2:27, 31), and from another came out of antitypical Sarah's womb. It was during His 3½ years' ministry while in the flesh that Jesus came out of Nominal Fleshly Zion, just as the man child by coming out of the Nominal Christian Church was born out of Nominal Spiritual Zion into the Truth as due. Certainly Jesus was no longer a part of Nominal Fleshly Zion when its leaders excommunicated Him as a blasphemer. When He arrived beyond the camp He was out of Nominal Fleshly Israel, as He started on His journey to leave it the moment His ministry began to make Him unpopular with those who sat in Moses' seat (Heb. 13:12-14). Thus Jesus' resurrection could not be the birth here typed. The mother of Jesus' new creature could not have been Nominal Fleshly Israel, for what is born of flesh is flesh. Again, in no sense was the mother of Jesus' new creature unclean, for it was the pure Truth that as a mother—antitypical Sarah—developed Jesus as a new creature. Hence the mother here typed cannot be Nominal Fleshly Israel. Israel's expiation cannot be the purifying here typed; for expiation is suffering to the limit deserved as punishment for sin, regardless of whether reformation sets in or not; while purifying is a cleansing work; moreover Israel was not purified by A.D. 73; nor was she gradually undergoing purification from 33 to 73 A.D.; rather Nominal Fleshly Zion was becoming more and more unclean ("the overspreading of abomination") each year from 33 to 73 A.D., and has continued unclean ever since, expiation being by it completed in 1878 (Is. 40:2) for rejecting

The Epiphany's Elect. 

110 

Christ; and in 1914 for sins against the Law (Lev. 26:24). Thus in every detail is the mother and the son in Lev. 12 misinterpreted by J.T.G. 

(24) Equally erroneous and foolish is his interpretation of the mother and the daughter with its accompanying details. Nominal Spiritual Zion will not be cleansed at the end of 80 years from 1878, but long before that—in the earthquake—will be annihilated. She will not bring the antitypical burnt-offering and sin-offering to Christ by that time; because she was eternally cast off from God's favor in 1878; and certainly if the voice of the Bridegroom and Bride will never again be heard in her, Jesus will never make an atonement for her. Nay, she remains eternally in the lake of fire from the earthquake onward (Rev. 20:10). Hence she will not bring the antitypical burnt and sin-offering in 1958, nor at any other time, nor will Jesus offer this on her behalf. Again, the sleeping saints by their resurrection in 1878 did not come out of the Nominal Christian Church, but came out of hades and out of antitypical Sarah's womb. Their spiritual birth, if it were from Nominal Spiritual Zion, would require her to be not nominally spiritual, but actually spiritual. Just as our Lord throughout His ministry in the flesh was coming out of Nominal Fleshly Zion and was completely out of it when utterly rejected by Nominal Fleshly Zion, so all through the Gospel Age since the Nominal Spiritual Zion came into existence, have the faithful while in the flesh come out of her and completed this coming out in every place just before Nominal Spiritual Zion began there to travail (Is. 66:7), this coming out being completed everywhere by Passover, 1916, which likewise overthrows the thought under review. The Nominal Church's expiation, which will be by eternal annihilation, cannot be the purifying here typed; because it has been becoming viler and viler ever since its rejection in 1878 and will be at its vilest at its annihilation, and thus will never be purified. 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

111 

(25) Thus in every detail the interpretation of J.T.G. on the mother and daughter and the connected events is proven erroneous (2 Tim. 3:9). And, dear brethren, in his third paragraph he says our interpretation is "mainly nonsense." He does not attempt to show its alleged nonsense. He who writes such folly on types inveighs a number of times against our dealing much in types! In the Foreword of Vol. III, we Scripturally justify our course on types, and that overthrows another Levitical and Jambresian outcry against the Epiphany Truth. 

(26) There has come to us for answer the following question: What do you think of Bro. Hugo Karlen's thought on the purification of the mother of a son and of a daughter (Lev. 12) as he gives it in his May, 1935, paper, The Stone Witness in Egypt? We answer: Bro. Karlen's view stated in his own words is as follows: "According to the Jewish Law, a woman giving birth to a man child, should go through a period of purification of 40 days. If she gave birth to a maid child, the period of purification should be 80 days. See Lev. 12:2-5. The woman here represented the whole Church of God on the earth; the Jewish Church during the time of the Old Covenant, which gave birth to the man child, Christ Jesus, and the general Christian Church, which brought forth the maid child, the Little Flock, Christ's coming bride. These 40 and 80 days in the type seem to picture forth the 40-year harvest of the Jewish Age, 29-69, and the Gospel Age 'harvest' of 80 years, 1874-1954." 

(27) The first thing that strikes our mind in Bro. H.K.'s view is its ambiguity and incompleteness. In the first place he speaks of the Jewish Church and "General" Christian Church as the whole Church of God on earth. While such a view is necessary for his theory, the Bible never by direct terms nor by inference intimates that the Jewish Church and the "general" Christian Church (whatever he means by the term

The Epiphany's Elect. 

112 

"general" in the last expression) are "the whole Church of God." Though the Bible does call Fleshly Israel (those called out of Egypt, since the word Church means those called out) the church in the wilderness (Acts 7:38), it never expressly nor by inference calls Fleshly Israel the Church of God nor a part of the Church of God. This term belongs exclusively to the true Christian Church, the Body of Christ, either as a whole (1 Cor. 10:32; 15:9; Gal. 1:13) or in ecclesias as local parts of it, in which case it uses actually or inferentially a qualifying term like the Church of God at Corinth, etc. (Acts 20:28; 1 Tim. 3:5; 1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1). In no sense is the Jewish and "general" Christian Church one church ("whole Church of God"). But what does he mean by the term, Jewish Church as the mother of Jesus? If he thereby means the Nominal Jewish Church, everything said above against J.T.G.'s same view applies against his view. In addition to what was said above against the pertinent part of J.T.G.'s view, the following must be said against this feature of H.K.'s view, if by the expression, the Jewish Church, he means Nominal Fleshly Israel: Since H.K. rightly holds that the 40 years of the Jewish Harvest were from 29 to 69, and since Jesus did not come out of Nominal Fleshly Israel in the sense of being no more a part of it, which was not a birth until April, 33, the 40 days could not type the 40 years from 29-69; hence could not type the 40 years from April, 33, to April, 73, which is J.T.G.'s false view of the time of the Jewish Harvest. Moreover, the term, man child, when referring to God's Anointed never in the Bible means Jesus alone; but means either Jesus and the Church as the Christ, the one new man (Is. 66:7; Eph. 2:15), or their counterfeit as the Anointed, Antichrist (Rev. 12:5, 13). Again, if by the term, "the Jewish Church," H.K. means real Fleshly Israel as distinct from real Spiritual Israel, he must thereby mean the faithful of the Old

Generalities on the Great Company. 

113 

Testament up to and including John the Baptist, as distinct from those Israelites indeed of the Jewish Harvests who, of course, then became Spiritual Israelites. Jesus in no sense, either as a human being or as a new creature, can be spoken of as being born, i.e., begun or developed by these Israelites indeed, in A.D. 29, because as to their sacrificed humanity and as to their new creatures they came after Him and never mothered Him in the Covenant, but came after Him in the same fellowships as He, in sacrifice of the humanity and in development of the new creature. Nor could He be spoken of as having come out of them in A.D. 29, for they continued with Him in fellowship (Luke 22:28). Hence He did not undergo even a figurative birth from them. He was not as a new creature begun by these or any other human; for it was God, after begetting Him, who directly applied without any human agent the Covenant promises to Him, i.e., acted in the place of the servants of the Truth as part of the mother in applying the Covenant promises. And for God there could be no atonement made after the 40 years or at any other time. Consequently, the term, "real Fleshly Israel," could in this connection be applied to the Ancient Worthies only. But these neither underwent a purification for 40 years, 29-69, nor at the end of that time did they bring the antitypical sin and burnt offering, since their last member, John the Baptist, had died about 38 years before. Neither did Jesus, the only atoning Priest officiating in the year 69, offer to Divine justice the merit of His sin offering for them, nor did He work on their behalf resuscitation from the dead, justification and restitution in the year 69, typed by offering the burnt offering for the mother of a son, since He as Head and the Church as Body will do these three things for the Ancient Worthies in the Millennium. While it is true that the Oath-bound promises in their highest features as antitypical Sarah did conceive Jesus in A.D. 29, which may be Scripturally regarded

The Epiphany's Elect. 

114 

as a reckoned birth, yet that Truth in so far as it conceived Him was then perfect, hence needed no purification for 40 years. Nor was any Ancient Worthy nor any other human the agent that brought Him to this spiritual conceiving; for John the Baptist did not minister the Sarah promises to Jesus. Hence we see that neither nominal nor real Fleshly Israel brought Jesus to a reckoned birth in A.D. 29, as H.K.'s theory requires. Hence, and additionally, since God took the place, in the mother, of the servants applying the Truth to Jesus, there was no one for whom the sin offering and burnt offering were presented for the mother in A.D. 69. These considerations overthrow H.K.'s view on the mother of the son. It will be noted that he did not attempt to explain the purification of the mother during the 40 years, its completion at their end, and how the antitypical sin and burnt offerings were made for her in A.D. 69. As shown above, none of these points can be explained according to his view. 

(28) Now as to his view on the mother of the daughter. What does he mean by the term, general Christian Church? If by that term he means the Nominal Church, the birth of the true Church from her was completed from 1914 to 1916, when the last members came out of her in each country just before it became involved in the World War, i.e., from 1914 to 1916 (Is. 66:7, Rev. 7:1-3). And such a birth began for the Church in the Time of the End, in 1846, when the cleansed Sanctuary first became separate and distinct from the nominal Church. Thus the true Church's birth from the nominal Church in the Time of the End does not agree with his date 1874. Moreover, before 1846 many companies of God's people left Babylon during the reformation and before, which again does not agree with his thought. Moreover, every argument that we used against J.T.G.'s thought as to the mother of the daughter being the nominal Church applies against H.K.'s thought on the same subject, if by the 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

115 

term, the general Christian Church, he means the nominal Christian Church. But if by that term he means the real Christian Church, we answer that the real Christian Church is not the mother of the Little Flock; for that would make the Little Flock its own mother; while the Bible teaches that its mother is the Sarah Covenant, which consists of the highest features of the Oath-bound promises and the servants in their capacity of applying those features to the development of the Little Flock (Is. 54:1-17; Gal. 4:21-32). Again, since he defines the daughter as the Little Flock, its reckoned birth set in at Pentecost, while his setting makes it 1874, which, as our view shows, was the date of the beginning (a figurative birth) of the Parousia Little Flock—then the Parousia section of the Little Flock was given a figurative birth—its Parousial start typed by Joseph's birth. Thus in either way of understanding the term, the general Christian Church, his understanding of the mother and daughter is proven wrong. Accordingly, his view of both the mother and son and the mother and daughter is thoroughly wrong. Our understanding of it as given above is the proper view of it, as it is in harmony with the seven axioms of Scriptural interpretation. 

We will now study some pertinent questions. 

Question: Is not the Great Multitude of Rev. 7:9-17 and 19:1-9 the Restitution class, and therefore not a Spiritual class? 

Answer: We think that they do not represent the Restitution, but a Spiritual class. This is clearly implied in v. 6, where their voice is distinguished from the voice of many waters, peoples, i.e., among others, some of those who will be of the Restitution class. More clearly yet is it implied in the family figure in vs. 7-9 by the fact that they are described as those who are invited to the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. In this picture the Bridegroom is Jesus, the Bride is the Little Flock, the Guests at the Marriage Supper are the Great Multitude. The following order of events 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

116 

connected with the family figure proves that these Guests could not be the Restitution class: First, there is the marriage; second and afterward, the marriage supper; third and still later, the begetting of children; and fourth and finally, their birth. The Great Multitude, the theme of Rev. 19:1-9, being the Guests at the Marriage Supper, cannot be the Restitution class, which will be the children of this Marriage, begotten and born after the Marriage Supper. The figure of Levites and Noblemen used in Rev. 7:15 likewise proves them not to be of the Restitution class. The expression, "serve Him day and night in His temple," proves them to be antitypical Levites. Here the figure is that of Priests, Levites and Israelites. The Priests are Jesus and the Church; the Israelites are the Restitution class; part of the Levites are the Great Company (Mal. 3:2, 3). The fact that the Levites had no inheritance in the land proves that the Millennial Levites will all either be or become spiritual; hence, none of them will ultimately be of the Restitution class. To be before God's kingly throne (Rev. 7:15), but not to stand before His judicial throne (Rev. 20:12), means to be a nobleman and officer of the Kingdom. Here in the Kingdom figure (not in the Court figure where He functions as judge) The Christ in the throne is the King; the Great Company are the officers, nobles, before the throne; and the Restitution class are the subjects of the King and the subordinates of His officers, the nobles; therefore, they are not represented in this scene, which implies a palace scene; for their place is outside of the palace. Ps. 45 introduces the same and additional distinctions. V. 1 introduces Jehovah; vs. 2-9 introduce Jesus; vs. 9-13 introduce the Church as Jesus' Bride; vs. 14 and 15 introduce the Great Company as the Bridesmaids; v. 16 introduces the Ancient Worthies as Christ's children and the Restitution class' princes; while v. 17 introduces the Restitution class separate and distinct from all other

Generalities on the Great Company. 

117 

classes. Ps. 107 also introduces the same and other distinctions; vs. 2-9 treat of the Little Flock; vs. 10-17 treat of the Great Company; vs. 17-22 treat of Fleshly Israel cast off from and restored to God's favor; vs. 23-32 treat of mankind during and just after the great tribulation; vs. 33-38 treat of the Restitution class during the Millennium; vs. 39 and 40 treat of the wicked, and vs. 41 and 42 of the righteous during the Little Season after the Millennium. What Paul says of the man that committed fornication with his father's wife (1 Cor. 5:5) proves that the Great Company will be spiritual; and hence will not be the Restitution class: "Deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh [for the overcoming of his evil disposition, that he might learn not to fornicate any more, even as Hymenaeus and Alexander were delivered unto Satan, that they might learn not to blaspheme any more, 1 Tim. 1:20] that the spirit [the new creature] may be saved [by being awakened from the dead as a spirit] in the day of the Lord Jesus." These considerations, among others, prove that the Great Multitude is not the Restitution, but a Spiritual class. 

(1) Question: Does not the fact that one is cut off from the World's High Priest disrobe him of Christ's righteousness, represented by the High Priest's linen robe? 

Answer: As we understand the matter it does not. If Aaron's robe alone would represent Christ's righteousness, then the robes of Aaron's sons would not represent that righteousness, which, of course, they do; nor would it be represented by the garments of Nadab and Abihu who, while being carried out in their priestly garments (Lev. 10:5), represent both of their antitypes as cut off from the Priesthood, however, at a stage in which they were not yet unto a completion in the condition representing the Second Death class, even as every one who is cut off from the antitypical Priesthood falls first into the Great Company, and 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

118 

only later some of them fall into the Second Death, represented here as in the finished picture. Moreover, the Levites wore white robes, tentatively representing Christ's righteousness, and in this picture, which is one figuring forth the Gospel-Age Levites, type a class that never was in Christ, the World's High Priest (1 Chro. 15:27). If the questioner's thought were correct, there would be no Great Company at all; for all cut off from The Christ would under these conditions have to go into the Second Death. Accordingly, we answer that the robe of Christ's righteousness, being worn by those in Christ, by the Great Company, and tentatively by the Youthful Worthies and the justified, is not for the World's High Priest alone. Hence one cut off from that class does not necessarily lose it. 

(2) Question: Are the errors of doctrine and practice of which the Great Company are guilty an evidence of the Lord's disapproval of them? 

Answer: We believe they are, so far as Little Flock membership is concerned. Had they been faithful, the Lord would not have permitted them to become thus deceived (Ps. 91:3-7). It is because they have been so willful as not to be submissive to His teachings, given by precept, that He has arranged for them to fall into Azazel's hands that they might be punished in the destruction of their flesh, and that by a sad experience, contaminated with Azazelian errors and practices, they might learn that their only safety is in the way of obedience to the Lord's teachings and arrangements. He also permits them to fall into these errors of doctrine and practice that they may learn the lesson that the Lord will not use them, but the Priesthood, as His primary mouthpiece; that it is not for them to approach His altar to offer incense—a privilege reserved for the Priests alone. Thus viewed, their going into errors of doctrine and practice is of a threefold character: (1) it is punitive, i.e., a punishment for sin; (2) it is educational, i.e., for reformation, in that it is

Generalities on the Great Company. 

119 

to teach them by sad experiences the unprofitableness of disobedience and the profitableness of obedience; (3) those of them who are rightly exercised by their experiences and learn to suffer joyfully for Truth and Righteousness will have these sufferings counted for the expiation of the world's willful sins. 

(3) Question: Should we not in Christian love and longsuffering continue to give priestly fellowship to manifested crown-losers? 

Answer: We should not in Christian love and longsuffering continue to give priestly fellowship to manifested crown-losers. To give them priestly fellowship is neither Christian love nor Christian longsuffering. The very God of love forbids it; and therefore to give it must be a violation of Christian love and longsuffering. A little consideration will show that it is neither Christian love nor Christian longsuffering to give them priestly fellowship. In the first place, it is a direct act of disobedience to God, who commands us to withdraw priestly fellowship from such (1 Cor. 5:5; 1 Tim. 1:18, 19; Lev. 13:3, 8, etc., 44-46). Again, God expressly charged the Israelites to be exceedingly careful to do what the manifesting and sentence-announcing priest charges to be done with their types, the spotted lepers, citing the case of Miriam, the classic type of crown-losers, as the typical example therefore (Deut. 24:8, 9). If it were not important to refuse such priestly fellowship, God would not have commanded such carefulness in doing it. Further, not only obedience to God requires it, but the protection of the other brethren from contamination requires it, as St. Paul suggests in 1 Cor. 5:5-7, and as the type of driving the contaminating leper outside the camp (Lev. 13:44-46; Num. 12:14, 15) suggests. Note how great has become the contamination of the various Truth groups, because they at the start failed to sever themselves from their manifested crown-lost leaders. Surely here a little leaven leavened the whole lump. 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

120 

Thirdly, the peace and prosperity of the faithful will be retarded by the failure to withdraw priestly fellowship from such. Then, the crown-losers would be hindered from their cleansing, if such fellowship were not withdrawn. Not only so, but it would result in the second death of such if, due to the failure to withdraw priestly fellowship from them, they do not cleanse themselves. Certainly only mischief alone could result to them and others from such failure, while the withdrawal of such fellowship is one of the indispensables for their cleansing. We are satisfied that the failure so to do will result in those failing so to do themselves becoming manifested as crown-losers; for such failure is revolutionism against one of God's arrangements. It is, therefore, not true Christian love and longsuffering which refuses to withdraw priestly fellowship from manifested crown-losers. On the contrary, the above-mentioned considerations prove that true Christian love and longsuffering dictate such withdrawal of fellowship from manifested Levites. 

(4) Question: How can we think of Satan as bound now, if he is instrumental in the destruction of the Great Company's flesh? 

Answer: To see daylight through this question we must realize that the binding of Satan, the individual, and the Satan system does not mean their inactivity, and that it is not an instantaneous act, but that it is a progressive matter, going through several stages. The binding of the individual Satan respects the fallen angels and means that our Lord gave the fallen angels so much Truth between 1874 and 1878 that Satan from then (1878) onward could no more control them as he had been doing before; yet he has otherwise continued very active among them. Again, the binding of the Satan system as respects the world is a progressive one, going through four stages, amid each one of which he displays great activities, as the following will show: The first stage was from 1874 to 1914 and 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

121 

thus preceded the World War. It gave the world so much Truth against the foundation errors of Satan's empire, the Divine right of kings, clergy and aristocracy, and against its supporting errors, eternal torment and the consciousness of the dead, as made it impossible for Satan longer to control mankind with those errors; yet he was very active while thus being bound. The second stage is now going on. It began at the end of the War and will be completed by Armageddon. It will give the world so much Truth as against dictatorships as will make it impossible for Satan to rule mankind by dictators, proven by the outbreak of Armageddon; yet during this stage of his binding Satan has been very active. The third stage of his binding will be between Armageddon and Anarchy, beginning at the end of the former and ending at the beginning of the latter. It will give the world so much Truth as will make it impossible for Satan to rule mankind by the Socialistic government that he will establish after Armageddon, which third stage of his binding as complete will be evident by the outbreak of Anarchy; yet Satan will be very active during that period. The fourth stage of Satan's binding will be during the reign of Anarchy, and will be active into its last phase, i.e., during the plundering expedition against the Jews of Palestine, which reign of Anarchy the Lord will destroy by overwhelming the plundering hosts of anarchists in Palestine through a mighty display of retributive justice. This stage of his binding will complete it from every standpoint, but amid each part of it Satan will be very active. When Anarchy will have been overthrown, Satan will not only have been completely bound, but he will then be spirited away from this earth and imprisoned, unable for the rest of the 1,000 years to tempt the people or to learn what is going on among them. The above five features of Satan's binding, one as to the fallen angels, the other four as to mankind, prove that his binding is a progressive 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

122 

one, stretching through five stages over a period of more than 80 years, and that his binding process does not mean that he is rendered therein inactive, but it does mean that as each stage is completed he will no longer be able to control through the errors whereby he controlled before such stage of his binding set in. Hence during each stage he has activity and power enough to destroy the fleshly minds of Levites. 

(5) Question: If God arranged for 60 groups of Epiphany Levites as antitypical posts for the Epiphany Tabernacle's Court, why do you blame the Levite leaders for making these various groups or antitypical posts of the Epiphany? Are they not thereby performing God's good pleasure? 

Answer: That the questioner is laboring under a misunderstanding is evident from a number of Scriptural passages and facts. Every one of such groups arises amid a sifting, as a sifting movement; and no sifting movement is Divinely approved (2 Thes. 2:9-11). All new-creaturely sifters defile God's Temple; hence they will end in destruction (1 Cor. 3:17; please note that this passage occurs amid a discussion, among other things, of new-creaturely leaders who are sifters, one of the things here discussed being the experiences of the saved Great Company members; Ezek. 9:7). Again, the pertinent types prove this of all new-creaturely sifters who defile God's Temple; e.g., Jannes and Jambres (Ex. 7:11, 12; 2 Tim. 3:1-9); Nadab and Abihu (Lev. 10:1-5, 8-11; see footnote in T-119, in editions from 1909 onward); Moses and Aaron smiting the rock (Num. 20:10-13; compare 1 Cor. 10:4; Heb. 6:6; 10:29) and the firstborn [leaders] of the captive that was in the dungeon [Great Company] (Ex. 12:29; compare with Heb. 2:15; Ps. 107:10, 14, 16; 69:33). Hence if in any of these sifting movements a new-creaturely leader defiles God's Temple, which occurs by his deceiving new creatures into his

Generalities on the Great Company. 

123 

sifting movement by his errors, he is not only not doing a Divinely approved, but is doing a Divinely disapproved work. How, then, are we to harmonize this teaching with the thought that God desires the 60 Epiphany posts about the Epiphany Tabernacle's Court? We answer, by keeping the following things separate and distinct in our minds: God does not have the Great Company groups in their uncleansed condition placed as antitypical posts about the Epiphany Court; because as such they are not doing God, but Azazel service. It is only as these groups are cleansed (for a parallel thought please see Lev. 14:49-53; and for the synonymous thought please see Num. 8:1-26) that they will be set up as antitypical posts about the Epiphany Court. Considering the typical posts, we can see that this is true of the direct type. When the trees from which the posts were made were developed as trees they corresponded to the groups formed by new-creaturely sifters. When they were cut down they were not yet posts in the court. At this stage of the type, cutting-down the trees, which are not yet made into posts, corresponds to the sifted groups under new creaturely sifting leaders getting the first impulses toward their being destined for antitypical posts. God's real servants cut down the antitypical trees by applying the first pertinent truths to these siftlings as individuals and groups. Next these cut-down trees were brought (Ex. 31:1-6) to Bezaleel (our Lord), Aholiab (the star-members) and their companions (especially, but not exclusively, the non-star-membered general elders), who sawed off this part, trimmed off that part, fixed the other parts of these cut-down trees, until they were actually no more trees, but posts fit to be set up in the Court of the Epiphany Tabernacle. The turning of these cut-down trees into posts types the work that our Lord, the Parousia and Epiphany messengers and their helpers have in the end of the Age put on the Great Company as individuals and as groups, fitting them as

The Epiphany's Elect. 

124 

groups and individuals of such groups to take their place as cleansed individuals in such cleansed groups about the Epiphany Tabernacle. The erecting of the antitypical posts is a future work. The work that is now going on consists in part of the growing and cutting down of such symbolic trees (gathering the siftlings into their pertinent groups and giving them their first impulses toward their future mission), and in part of the sawing and trimming off of excess parts of the symbolic trees (driving out of the groups unfit leaders and led ones, cutting off their wrong teachings, works, arrangements and organizational features). The work that yet remains to be done on these symbolic trees and posts is the completion of the above mentioned things, the giving of right teachings, works, arrangements and organizations to these groups, as well as to superintend their cleansing, as typed in Num. 8 and Lev. 14. And, finally, these things having been done, the posts will be put around the Epiphany Tabernacle, i.e., put into their right spheres of service. We believe that we will shortly see this work enter its final stages of tree-growing and cutting-down, and, to speak literally of the other features, of ridding the groups of their evils and of giving them the positive equipments and positions for their true Levitical service. This explanation will enable us to see the erroneousness of the implications in the question under consideration. Hence we answer the question: While God has arranged for the 60 Epiphany posts to be placed around the Epiphany Court, He disapproves as evil the work of the Levite leaders in forming the groups of uncleansed Levites, as a forbidden sifting work. 

(6) Question: Is it proper to say that the Great Company is doing Azazel's work, or should we say that they are in Azazel's hand for such experiences as are Divinely intended to result in their cleansing, or is their work partly a work for the Lord? 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

125 

Answer: To us it seems that all three queries in our question require an affirmative answer. Certainly their revolutionizing against the Lord's teachings and arrangements, and introducing false teachings and arrangements, prove them to be doing Azazel's work. The fact that they are called Azazel's Goat proves that they do his work, just as the contrasted name, the Lord's Goat, proves that the Little Flock is doing Jehovah's work. It is also true that they are in Azazel's hand for such experiences as are Divinely intended to result in their cleansing, even as St. Paul says of some of this class, as illustrations of the entire class: "Deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit [new creature] may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus" (1 Cor. 5:5). "Of whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme" (1 Tim. 1:20). Their work, especially toward the public, is in part a work for the Lord. The good part of their mind enables them to do some things that are a service for the Lord, while the bad part of their mind prompts them to do a service that is for Azazel. Double-minded and double-serving, they are in a pitiable condition. But in due time the reformable among them will gain by the blood and ministry of the Lamb deliverance from their bondage unto the liberty that the single-minded new creature enjoys. We fervently pray for this on their behalf. 

(7) Question: What is meant by the expression, "A Good Levite"? 

Answer: For the Epiphany a good Levite is a new creature who, as it were, just failed of winning the crown, who disapproves of revolutionisms against the Parousia truths and arrangements, who either has accepted and served the Epiphany Truth, or will shortly accept and serve it, and who before his manifestation as a Levite will revolutionize against the Epiphany arrangements. 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

126 

(8) Question: What are some of our Pastor's testimonies on the Great Company as Levites, separated from the Little Flock of Priests, and manifested as such in the extreme end of the Gospel Age—during the Epiphany? 

Answer: We will give a few from among a number. The first of these is in Z '11, p. 22, pars. 5, 6; par. 5, beginning at the 8th line, as follows: "Similarly, those who have made a full consecration are subjected to severe tests, and, if they prove unfaithful, they will not remain members of the Royal Priesthood. But this does not prove that these will be unworthy of some opportunity for serving the Lord. These will be represented in the Levite class. [The antitype of which will be the Great Company.] All the Levites are consecrated to God. But the 'more than conquerors' are the selected ones, the ones who stand the tests and prove faithful. Such as fail to stand these tests then will be rejected from the condition represented in the Holy, which is the 'gold' condition and represents the Divine nature. Being denied the liberty accorded to the Priests, these will go out from this condition and will have merely the standing of justification, which, if they maintain, will constitute them worthy of eternal life. But that life will not be human, because they gave that up in order to become Priests. Their failure puts them out of the Holy condition back into the Court condition. Only the Priests will be in the HOLY. Only the Levites will be in the Court. But even the chosen ones, while separated in their minds, will be commingling with the others so far as their persons are concerned. The Court, therefore, in its last analysis, represents the Spirit-begotten ones as separated from the world. The Great Company class are, therefore, not represented as in the Camp, but are attached to the Priests." 

We will proceed to the next reference, which is in Z '11, p. 234, col. 2, pars. 4, 5, beginning at par. 4, line 4: "The Lord's arrangement is that the Great Company

Generalities on the Great Company. 

127 

class shall have a special trial and testing and shall be forced forward in the time of trouble [italics ours], inasmuch as they did not carry out their covenant of sacrifice willingly. We must remember that the types of the Law-Covenant were arranged to represent matters as they would be seen by us in the Conclusion of the antitypical Day of Atonement, and not to represent the things as they would be seen while they were in progress" [i.e., as they progressed at the time he wrote]; "some one might take our Crown; and we might be thus relegated to the 'Great Company.' So these things represent the results as they will be in the end of this Age. There will be a 'Great Company' class which will bear certain iniquities." The next reference is Z '11, p. 349, col. 2, last par.: "While the Court condition seems to represent at the present time all those who are approaching God and loving righteousness and desiring harmony with Him, it appears as though, with the closing of this Age, there will be an adjustment of matters by which all those who have not come to the point of full consecration and to the point of Spirit-begetting, who would not belong to the household of faith and to the 'Church of the Firstborn,' in the absolute sense, will go out and cease to be recognized as in the Court. Meantime, the class who have already made consecration, 'presented their bodies living sacrifices,' received the begetting of the Spirit and enjoyed for a time the privileges of being members of the Body of Christ—these, failing to maintain their standing, are represented as separated from the 'Little Flock' class at the end of this Age [italics ours]. Their condition apparently is represented by the Court Condition thereafter." Our next reference is Z '16, p. 39, par. 1: "They [Elijah and Elisha] simply walked on. Suddenly the chariot of fire appeared and separated them. … What does this signify in antitype? We think that it signifies a division between the Little Flock and the Great Company." Z '16, p. 264, par. 1: "It will be after

The Epiphany's Elect. 

128 

the smiting of the Jordan—after the division of the people by the message of the Truth and the mantle of Elijah's power—that the separation of the Church into two classes will take place. Thereafter, the Elijah class, the Little Flock class, will be clearly manifested, separate and distinct from the Great Company class. The division, be it remembered, will be caused by the fiery chariot." Next we quote from the Reprints, Vol. 7, 5846, col. 1, par. 2: "Are you expecting the fiery chariot any minute now, or do you think it some little distance off—perhaps some months yet, or perhaps a year, or probably more, is my thought." Finally we quote from the 1916 Convention Report, p. 198, col. 2, par. 2, under Q. 10, beginning in the 4th line, "the Great Company class will first be manifested when the Elijah class will be separated by the fiery chariot, that from that time and onward it would be proper to speak of some as being of the Little Flock and others of the Great Company, but that division not having yet been made of the Lord, you and I would not be authorized to recognize any such division which God has not recognized. It will be for Him to determine who are of the Little Flock and who of the Great Company. … We do not understand, therefore, that they are to be viewed as being in the Court at the present time, but after the Lord has manifested the distinction between the Elijah class, the Royal Priesthood class, and the Great Company class, the Elisha class, then thereafter those will be represented as being in the Court. But not yet. The division has not yet taken place." (This was said in 1916.) 

(9) Question: Since the Great Company Levites no longer have access to the antitypical lampstand and table, on what do they feed to sustain their spiritual lives? 

Answer: They would, of course, be able to feed on what they once had while in the Holy; but for the most part they neglect this and see only counterfeit light, 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

129 

i.e., such as never was on the antitypical lampstand, and thus partake of unclean bread, i.e., such as never was on the antitypical table. So far as the meat in due season—the advancing Truth—is concerned, they do not partake of, but reject it, while in the fit man's and Azazel's hands. And as a result their new creatures are famished, weak, sickly and asleep, out of which sleep some of them will never awaken. After the Levites' cleansing, they will doubtless partake of the Epiphany truths that are for them; for then they will be somewhat like the good Youthful Worthies, who are privileged to see and appreciate every truth except such truths as the Lord may desire to be limited to the priests. Let us remember that in the transitional period everything is to be open to the cleansed Levites except such things reserved to the priests alone; and in the Millennium everything in the Bible will be seen by the Ancient and Youthful Worthies and by the faithful restitutionists. The only thing that the consecrated faithful natural man will then not appreciatively see is the operation of the Spirit of begettal. So is it now with the good Youthful Worthies. So will cleansed Levites appreciate everything in spiritual matters except such as pertain to the operation of the completed anointing. Whatever, however, the Lord may give during the Epiphany for the priests alone will be for them alone, until it has served its secret purpose; then it will be understood by the properly disposed Levites. E.g., now the understanding of the priestly matters pertinent to leading Azazel's Goat to the Gate, delivering him to the fit man and abandoning him to Azazel, is withheld from them. After they are cleansed they will understand these things. So there will doubtless be things connected with the priests' activities toward them after they are cleansed which will be concealed from them until the secrecy has served its purposes, when they will be clarified to them. We are in the transitional period as respects the Gospel and

The Epiphany's Elect. 

130 

Millennial Ages. During the Gospel Age very many Biblical things—the things of the Spirit—were concealed from all but new creatures. During the Millennium, when the secret features of God's Plan will have been carried out, they, except the operation of the Spirit of begettal, will be understood by all the faithful consecrated. Now God is treating the faithful non-priests in the same way. Hence this transitional period partakes more of the Millennial than the Gospel-Age privileges in this respect. This change of operation began in 1881 with the ending of the general call; for from that time on the Lord gave all the faithful consecrators for whom no crowns were available an understanding of all deep things, except an appreciative understanding of the operation of the Spirit of begettal in the heart. 

(10) Question: Do you expect the cleansing of the Levites to be completed before the revolution? 

Answer: So far as the Nominal Church Levites are concerned, we do not expect their cleansing before the revolution; for the great bulk of them will in the revolution be finally put into the fit man's hands. Nor are we to expect that all of the Truth Levites will have their cleansing completed by that time. We believe that the cleansing of the good Levites and the better of the other Levites began in the fall of 1923, and their cleansing is progressing. If the two thieves type the two classes of the last uncleansed Truth Levites, i.e., the worse and the worst of the bad Levites, the cleansing of the less bad of these would begin just before the revolution, while the worst of the bad Levites would apparently not begin to get their cleansing before the revolution, if indeed they are to get it at all. Our present data are rather meager on this subject, and therefore our answer must be more or less incomplete. Doubtless later we will have more light on the subject. 

(11) Question: Should one co-operate in the work 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

131 

toward Azazel's Goat, if not certain that he is in the Body of Christ? 

Answer: It is proper to help in the work toward Azazel's Goat, if one is consecrated and knows that such a work is in the Divine order. For such should always resist revolutionism and withdraw fellowship from revolutionists, and brotherly help and favor from willful revolutionists. For this reason we encourage Youthful Worthies to assist the priests against Azazel's Goat. And they do this, e.g., giving us names and addresses of Truth people for volunteer literature, testifying against revolutionism by word of mouth and participating in antitypical Gideon's Second Battle, and in the distribution of Elijah's Letter and John's Rebuke. Of course, even a cleansed Levite should properly resist the revolutionism of Azazel's Goat and they have in not a few cases done so. While God does not count such activity as a part of the activity of the World's High Priest, He nevertheless approves of it as a work of righteousness. If one is a new creature and is not manifested as a Levite, even if he fears that he is not in the Priesthood, he should believe he is of it and cast out his fears, which doubtless come from Satan; for God counts all new creatures as priests who have not been manifested as Levites. 

(12) Question: Shall we regard as Levites those brethren who reject the Epiphany Truth? 

Answer: If they have not been in the Epiphany Truth, we should not now regard them as Levites for such rejection; for God is keeping the Epiphany Truth hidden from those priests, in the various groups, whom He desires less markedly than the Epiphany saints to resist the revolutionism of the groups where they are. There are two classes among the priests: the more and the less courageous. The former He gives the Epiphany Truth for a more pointed resistance of Azazel's Goat. One could not remain among the Levite groups and offer such marked resistance. Therefore, the Lord

The Epiphany's Elect. 

132 

lets the less courageous priests remain among these groups for a milder resistance not incompatible with their remaining among them, but withholds from them the Epiphany Truth, so that they might remain with a good conscience where they are. Those new creatures who have had the Epiphany Truth and then rejected it, are to be regarded as Levites; for they have revolutionized against the Lord in His Epiphany purposes. 

(13) Question: How may we be sure whether a person is a priest or a Levite? 

Answer: We should accept all brethren as priests who consecrated before Oct., 1914, and came into the Truth by Passover, 1916, if they are not revolutionists or partisan supporters of such. While some who consecrated before Oct., 1914, and came into the Truth before Passover, 1916, are Youthful Worthies, we do not know who these are. Therefore, we are to accept all brethren, having consecrated before Oct., 1914, and having received the Truth before Passover, 1916, as priests, unless they revolutionize or partisanly support revolutionists. It is revolutionism or its partisan support against the Truth and its arrangements, and only revolutionism or its partisan support against the Truth and its arrangements, that manifests crown-losers as such. The great touchstone of manifesting Leviteship is revolutionism or its partisan support, and nothing else. The reason that misconduct cannot be the touchstone for us is that we do not know how to decide what varying degrees of misconduct in various brethren forfeit their crowns. Therefore such judging is forbidden. The Lord alone—the heart searcher—is competent to give such a decision. We have no right to judge anyone to Leviteship. But, after God, by the individual's revolutionism or its partisan support, has manifested him to us as a Levite, then, of course, we as parts of the Priesthood are privileged to declare the Lord's manifested judgment as such. We earnestly exhort the brethren to take heed to the thing that manifests 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

133 

Leviteship, and we earnestly caution them against making character blemishes on the grounds of declaring brethren to be Levites. 

(14) Question: If no Levites were in the court on the day of atonement, how could antitypical Levites—the Great Company and Youthful Worthies—assist the World's High Priest in leading out the antitypical Goat of Azazel? 

Answer: Not everyone that acts toward Azazel's antitypical Goat is pictured in the type. This is so in this instance, because, had the type recorded such a thing it would have taught an untruth. E.g., if the Levites in the type had assisted Aaron in leading out Azazel's goat, it would mean in the antitype that the new creatures of the Great Company in every case would assist the World's High Priest in leading out his own humanity from the antitypical Court; even as the activity of Aaron's body in the sacrifice of the Lord's goat types each Body member of the World's High Priest co-operating with the Head in sacrificing that Body member's humanity. Of course the antitypical Levites do not assist in leading forth their own humanity. Any assistance that a Great Company new creature or a Youthful Worthy, as a Levite, gives the World's High Priest in leading Azazel's antitypical Goat forth, is rendered in relation to others than himself. This they often do, e.g., many antitypical Kohathite and Gershonite Levites resist the revolutionism of the antitypical Merarites. Among others, the P.B.I. and Hirshite adherents have fought the Society on the 1925 error, even as many of the Society adherents, as antitypical Merarites, have fought the P.B.I. adherents, antitypical Gershonites, on their false chronology, etc. The Youthful Worthies in the Epiphany Truth have also rendered assistance in this work to the World's High Priest. They could not have been represented in this work by typical Levites assisting Aaron with Azazel's goat, because that would mean that their 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

134 

humanity is represented in Azazel's goat, which represents the humanity of the Great Company alone. 

(15) Question: Are there any members of the Azazel Goat class in the Nominal Church who are to be led to the gate and to the fit man? 

Answer: The bulk of Azazel's Goat is now in the Nominal Church; and through antitypical Gideon's Second Battle we are leading its Protestant section to the gate and to the fit man; and through Elijah's Letter and John's Rebuke we are leading its Catholic section to the gate and to the fit man. Our Lord indicates that such are now in the Nominal Church when He exhorted that the flight from Babylon be not delayed until the Time of Trouble—the Epiphany: "Pray that your flight be not in the winter." Jeremiah indicates the same thing when he expresses the disappointment of this class in the words: "The summer is past, the winter is here, and we are not saved," i.e., from Babylon. The foolish virgins not getting the oil and its consequent light until the wise have all entered the door of the high calling and it is closed, proves the same thing; for we are now over many years beyond the ending of Spirit-begetting. Since Spirit-begetting has long since ceased and those in the Truth are by no means enough to constitute a company much larger than the Little Flock, and since the Great Company is saved during the tribulation, the bulk of its members must be now in Babylon (Rev. 7:14) Some will only then be delivered after Babylon is destroyed (Ps. 107:14-16). But Babylon is not yet destroyed. It would not at all surprise us, if from 500,000 to 1,000,000 Great Company members should be now in Babylon. 

(16) Question: Are the Great Company brethren branches in the Vine, or are they pruned off? 

Answer: The Great Company as such are not particularized in the figure of the Vine and Branches. We know that crown-losers all through the Age have been by God counted as parts of the Embryo Christ, until 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

135 

in the Fall of 1916 the Lord began to lead them forth out of the Holy into the Court. It is from this same standpoint that they were in the Vine as branches during the Gospel Age. Hence they are not the branches that were cut off from the Vine and burned. Those so treated are the Second Death class, whose second death is symbolized by the fire and the destruction of the cast-off branches. 

(17) Question: Is the Great Company being now manifested to us as such—a thing denied by Bro. Oleczynski? 

Answer: Bro. Oleczynski's criticism of us (without mentioning our name) is quite sharp, because of our teaching that the Great Company is now being manifested to the Faithful, he claiming that this makes us a judge contrary to the Lord's Word. Here again his error is a revolutionism against our Pastor's teaching, who said that (not before, but) after the separation of Elijah and Elisha it would be proper for us to point out this and that one as being in the Little Flock, or as being of the Great Company, when the Lord shall have revealed them as such to us. We will quote our Pastor's words, in one instance, on this subject. In the 1916 Convention Report, page 198, 2nd col., Question 10, speaking of the separation of antitypical Elijah and Elisha, our Pastor says, "From that time and onward it would be proper to speak of some as being of the Little Flock and others of the Great Company." But Bro. Oleczynski boldly contradicts our Pastor, saying that it is forbidden judging to do this. There was a time that he believed that the separation in the Church in 1917 was the separation of antitypical Elijah and Elisha, and that it was right to consider the Society's president, etc., as of the Great Company; for which reason he accepted our article on the subject published in the English Truth No. 60, and in the Polish Truth No. 1, and translated it into Polish for publication. As a P.B.I. sympathizer he very 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

136 

likely now rejects it. If so, he has probably accepted the P.B.I. position which, unable to answer our interpretation of the events of 1917 as the fulfillment of our Pastor's forecast of the separation between antitypical Elijah and Elisha, denies that the smiting of Jordan and Elijah's and Elisha's separation are typical! Our arguments on this subject have never been met, either by the Society or the P.B.I. in their repeated efforts to do so. The reason is plain: Our view of the matter is the Truth, the great foundation Epiphany Truth, and as such it is unshakable. If that separation has taken place, of course those who understand it Scripturally can see who is of antitypical Elijah and who is of antitypical Elisha; for if they could not see this, they could not see the separation which implies the classes becoming distinct from one another. 

There are other considerations that prove this. Our Pastor taught that in the very end of the Age, i.e., during the Epiphany, the crown-losers would be driven out of the Holy into the Court as Levites distinct from the Priests. After such manifestation they were to be cleansed and consecrated to the Levite office (Num. 8:5-19). It will be noticed (Num. 8:13) that the typical Levites were set before Aaron and his sons, who cleansed and consecrated them to their Levite service. This types that Jesus and the Church would cleanse and set them aside for their Divinely pleasing work, not for the Azazelian work that they are now doing. Aaron and his sons had to see them as Levites in order to consecrate them. This types that not only Jesus, but that also the Church on this side the vail would see just who are Levites, otherwise the Church could not co-operate with Jesus in their cleansing and consecration. Had Aaron's sons not seen them, they would have been blind, which would have debarred them from priestly functions, and therefore from the work of cleansing and consecrating the Levites (Lev. 21:17, 18). Their seeing the Levites types the antitypical Priests

Generalities on the Great Company. 

137 

seeing the antitypical Levites as distinct from themselves—the Little Flock now seeing the Great Company as distinct from itself. We would be spiritually blind in this respect, if we did not see them and thus of course could not co-operate in cleansing and consecrating them. This proves that the Little Flock at the pertinent time—now in the Epiphany, the very end of the Age—would know the Great Company, i.e., that the latter would be manifest to the former. 

Such recognition of the Great Company as such has been grossly misrepresented as "judging." This we emphatically deny to be the case. God by Jesus had done all of this judging when He, by October, 1914, took away the crown from the last of the crown-losers. It was at least several years later that He began to manifest them to the faithful Priests. And how did He manifest them? Certainly not by the latter judging them. They are incapable of judging them; for to judge implies the ability to discern exactly the kind and degree of conduct that forfeits the crown. This requires an ability among other things to read the heart and to know exactly what varying degree of willfulness in each case causes the crown to be forfeited. These things we, of course, cannot do. But God can and did do this. Then later on He manipulated circumstances so that the Great Company's double-mindedness would lead them to revolutionize against God's teachings and arrangements. After they did that, He then revealed to us what we did not know before the Epiphany, i.e., that by their revolutionism God manifests the Great Company brethren as such to the Little Flock (Ps. 107:10, 11). When we found out that their revolutionism was the means that God was using to inform us, i.e., manifest to us, that they were Levites, we of course saw them as such. But our seeing them as such was no more judging them as such than if as spectators at a trial when we see a judge sentence a criminal we recognize the latter as sentenced. What sane person

The Epiphany's Elect. 

138 

would say that our recognizing him as sentenced makes us judge him? Thus we can readily see that our recognizing God's manifestations of Levites as such is not our judging them. But we do accept, endorse and act in harmony with God's judgment of them, when we recognize and announce them to be Levites. We cannot do this in any case, however, unless persistent revolutionism, e.g., like Bro. Oleczynski's, is exercised. Then, when it is exercised, we know that the Lord has manipulated circumstances in their lives in such a way as reveals to us their double-mindedness in revolutionism; and thereby He tells us that He has judged them as having forfeited their crowns, i.e., as having been cast out of the Little Flock into the Great Company. Thereupon, knowing that they are no longer in the Holy, we withdraw priestly fellowship from them. Knowing that they, as Levites in the Court, are our brethren, we give them as much brotherly fellowship as their revolutionism permits. If this greatly displeases them, we cannot help it. We must act toward them as the Lord desires us to do, and cannot accept and act out their revolutionistic desires for us to continue to recognize them as Priests, nor can we feel and act toward them exactly as we did before they were manifested as Levites. By and by, however, when they are cleansed, they will recognize that our course toward them was the right one for us to take—typed by Aaron's leading the goat to the Gate, delivering it to the fit man and later abandoning it in the wilderness to Azazel. And until they will so recognize it, we are content to bear their mistreatment of us as incidental to our faithfulness, as parts of the World's High Priest, to our mission toward Azazel's Goat. 

(18) Question: In dealing with the Catholic section of Azazel's Goat, why do we not limit our Double Herald work to the Civil rulers and to Catholics, even

Generalities on the Great Company. 

139 

as John did not deliver the rebuke to Salome, but rebuked Herod and Herodias? 

Answer: In answer to this question a number of things should be said: (1) We do not deliver the rebuke of antitypical Herod and Herodias to antitypical Salome—the Federation of Churches, an organization—though we do deliver it to individual Protestants, but do so regardless of their relation to the Federation of Churches. (2) There is no evidence that John delivered his rebuke to Herod or Herodias to their face, though when it was reported to Herod, it appeared and appealed to him as a direct personal rebuke, for which reason it is Scripturally stated in the second person (Matt. 14:4; Mark 6:18). John's rebuke of Herod was addressed to the people. Perhaps if the rebuke had been given privately to Herod, he would not have so greatly resented it, since it would not have struck him as injuring his prestige and influence among the people. (3) In leading the Truth section of Azazel's Goat to the Gate, we do not send our rebuking literature to those of them who are of a certainty known to us as such, but to other Truth people. Nor do we give the Truth literature that rebukes the Protestant section of Azazel's Goat to the members of that class known to us as such, for which reason we avoid giving such literature, among others, to the Protestant Clergy among whom are many members of Azazel's Goat. By distributing the pertinent literature to those open to its message, we resist before them the revolutionism of these two sections of Azazel's Goat. (4) To hand the Double Herald to the Catholic Clergy and to their known partisan and bigoted supporters, would mean to lead the Catholic part of Azazel's Goat to the Gate by a totally different method from that employed in connection with the Truth and the Protestant sections of Azazel's Goat, and we see no reason for a departure from the method so far used and blessed. We do, however, see reasons against using the 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

140 

method of directly giving the rebuking literature to known members of the Catholic section of Azazel's Goat, e.g., the stirring up of unnecessary strife and perhaps riots. (5) It is more effective to resist the Catholic section of Azazel's Goat in its revolutionism by arousing Protestants to oppose its revolutionism than by appealing to its supporters to do this. (6) To give the rebuke directly to the Catholic Church would interfere with our purpose and make our work ineffective, since it would lead to the almost immediate suppression of the work. (7) If the Double Herald work is in part antitypical John's rebuke, the most sober methods of presenting it should be used, and these we believe to be the ones that we are using, and which have been so abundantly blessed of the Lord. 

(19) Question: What is priestly as distinct from brotherly fellowship? 

Answer: Priestly fellowship consists of new creatures' jointly seeing in the light of the antitypical candlestick the Truth as due for the Priests to enjoy, partaking jointly of the antitypical loaves of presence, the truths that strengthen us in every good thought, quality, word and work for our Heavenward journey, and sacrificing and suffering jointly at the antitypical Altar in priestly work. Priestly fellowship, therefore, is a joint participation in the enlightening and strengthening truths and in sacrificing and suffering in the High Calling. In these respects we do not fellowship with the Great Company, Youthful Worthies and the Tentatively Justified, all of whom are our brethren from various standpoints. There are some truths and some works that they and the Priests have in common, i.e., more or less of the Truths in the Volumes and the work of testifying to the coming Kingdom and against certain errors, etc. In these we have more or less fellowship; but it is not to be so intimate as that which we have with the Priests. Where any of them mix errors and wrongs with any of these things we of 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

141 

course are not to fellowship therein with them. With Great Company members very little brotherly fellowship can be enjoyed by the Priests until the former are cleansed. Indeed, after they fall into Azazel's hands the Priests must withdraw all brotherly help and favor from them until they are cleansed. 

(20) Question: When the former is withheld, is it to be understood that the latter is also? 

Answer: No, except as the modifications just given apply. 

(21) Question: Have we Scriptural examples of this? 

Answer: In Bible times the Great Company as such did not exist. Hence in those times it required a Divine revelation to manifest any individual who had lost his crown. We have mention in the Bible of three individuals of this kind, all of whom had gone so far wrong as to be in Azazel's hand, cut off from all brotherly help and favor (1 Cor. 5:1-13; 1 Tim. 1:20). Nothing is said on the subject of fellowship with respect to Hymenaeus and Alexander; but in the case of the Corinthian brother the brethren were told not to fellowship with him (1 Cor. 5:9-13); nor did they fellowship with him until he was cleansed (2 Cor. 2:6-10). Perhaps in this case, his sin being reprehensible even to the heathen (1 Cor. 5:1), the cause of Truth required severer treatment than should be given the average Great Company member. 

(22) Question: Are you not arrogating Apostolic powers when you point out individuals as members of the Great Company? 

Answer: When our Pastor said that only an Apostle could know who was in the Great Company, he referred to conditions prior to the Epiphany; for at that time there was no Great Company as such. Hence it was wrong for any of us before the Epiphany to say of this or that one that he was of the Great Company; for Divine inspiration was necessary to know it then; 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

142 

hence it was then a purely Apostolic power. But since the Epiphany began (Mal. 3:2, 3; 1 Cor. 3:12-15; 2 Tim 4:1), the Great Company as such has been coming into existence. Hence now Divine illumination—not Divine inspiration—on Epiphany matters is all that is needed to recognize members of the Great Company as such, even as our Pastor taught would be the case after the Little Flock and Great Company as such were separated. (Z '16, p. 264, col. 1, par. 1; Convention Report 1916, p. 198, col. 2, ques. 10.) As in the type Aaron and his sons would have been physically blind or nearly so, if they could not have seen the Levites as such, when they were set before them as such at the time of their cleansing and consecration (Num. 8:13), so would we in the antitype be spiritually blind or nearly so, if we could not now see the Levites as such as the Lord is setting them before us as such at this the time of their cleansing and consecration. 

Question: How can we of a certainty know that a new creature is of the Great Company? 

Answer: By his clear, persistent revolutionism against the Lord's teachings and arrangements (Ps. 107:11). 

(23) Question: Will the Great Company realize and acknowledge that they constitute that class, while yet in the flesh? Or will they continue to the end to believe and claim that they are in the High Calling? 

Answer: Our understanding is that while yet in the flesh the Great Company class will recognize themselves as such. This is clearly shown by their message given while they will yet be among men: "Let us be glad and rejoice and give honor to Him; for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and His Wife hath made Herself ready" (Rev. 19:7). The marriage is the First Resurrection. It will not be announced by the Great Company in Heaven; for it will be completed before they reach Heaven, and thus will be known there before their arrival. Hence they make the announcement 

Generalities on the Great Company. 

143 

of it as a completed thing while here in the flesh, and thus show that they recognize themselves as not of the Bride. This is also implied in the account of the cleansing, consecration and service of the Levites in the Tabernacle as set forth in Num. 8:5-22; for here the Levites are represented as recognizing themselves as set apart for Levitical service as the servants of Aaron and his son, typing how the Great Company will recognize their setting apart while in the flesh to be the servants of Jesus and the Church. The same thought is typed in Joseph's brethren recognizing him as separate and distinct from themselves, Joseph here typing Jesus and the Church. The cry, "The harvest is passed, the summer is ended, and we are not saved" (Jer. 8:20), is another proof that the Great Company will, while in the flesh, recognize themselves as such. The following passages imply the same thing: Cant. 5:6; Ps. 107:13-15; Matt. 25:10-12, 30. Therefore we understand that the Great Company while yet in the flesh will recognize themselves as constituting this Company. 

(24) Question: Do you understand that the only sins which the sufferings of the Great Company will expiate on behalf of the world will be deliberate sins against the Lord's Law and people? 

Answer: Yes. 

(25) Question: Do not the bullock, the Lord's goat and Azazel's goat represent three different phases of our Lord Jesus' one sacrifice, alone? 

Answer: We do not so understand matters. The 1908 to 1911 sifters, as antitypical Korah (1 Cor. 10:10, 11; Num. 16:1-50; P '19, p. 144, col. 2, par. 1), taught that they did; but the fact that antitypical Korah so taught should prompt the Faithful to conclude that such teaching is erroneous. To date they have failed to show any reason why the death of two of the beasts and the sending away alive of the third into the wilderness should type three aspects of Jesus' 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

144 

one sacrifice. Without any Scriptural warrant they—rather, Satan—invented this theory in order to evade the plain Scriptural teachings that there are two antitypical sin-offerings, or to put it another way, one sin-offering in two parts, and that there is one antitypical expiation for willful sins. As repeatedly shown, Hebrews 7:26, 27 teaches the World's High Priest and two sin-offerings—that of Jesus, offered first, and that for the sins of those who during the Gospel-Age have become members of His body, and then afterwards that of the Church, offered for the people's sins. Heb. 13:11, 12 identifies Jesus' sacrifice with that of the bullock, which was the first beast burned without the camp, as Jesus' sacrifice preceded that of the Church; and then verses 13 and 14 identify the sacrifice of the Church, which follows that of Jesus, with that of the Lord's goat, which, after the bullock's burning without the camp, was likewise burned there, i.e., it was treated just like the bullock, the type of Jesus. In Heb. 9:16, 17 (see Diaglott), the Apostle by the doctrinal statement of the fact assures us that the blood-sealed Covenants of God's Plan are sealed by plurality of sacrifices. This proposition he then proceeds to prove by a reference to the only two blood-sealed Covenants of God's Plan—the Law Covenant and the New Covenant. The proof that the Law Covenant as a blood-sealed Covenant was sealed by a plurality of sacrifices—bulls and goats—St. Paul gives in Heb. 9:18, 19; and the proof that the New Covenant will be sealed by a plurality of sacrifices—"better sacrifices" than those of the Law Covenant—St. Paul gives in Heb. 9:23. It is because the Lord's antitypical Goat is not yet completely sacrificed unto death that we know that the New Covenant is not yet sealed and in operation (Heb. 9:16, 17). Thus the Apostle teaches that the bullock and the goat type Jesus and the Church. Furthermore, Azazel's (Satan's) goat is identified by St. Paul with the Great Company (1 Cor. 5:5; 1 Tim. 1:19, 20); for just as Azazel's goat was

Generalities on the Great Company. 

145 

sent away to him in the wilderness, so the Corinthian brother and Hymenaeus and Alexander, as representative members of the Great Company, were delivered over to Satan—Azazel. Thus we find the Scriptures to teach that the bullock, the Lord's goat and Azazel's goat do not type three aspects of Jesus' one sacrifice, but type respectively Jesus, the Church, and the Great Company, in their consecrated humanity, and that the sacrifice of the bullock and the goat as sin-offerings type the sacrifice of Jesus and the Church, His Body, as sin-offerings. There are many other Scriptures that teach the Church's participation with Jesus in the sin-offering. Those consecrated Spirit-begotten persons who (apart from such as through misrepresentations were led to believe that the Truth teachings were to the effect that the Ransom and the sin-offering are one and the same thing) deny that the Church is a part of the sin-offering count "the blood of the [sacrificial] Covenant, wherewith they were sanctified [not justified] an unholy thing [not as of the sin-offering, hence a thing not pertaining to the holy things of the Altar and the Mercy Seat]" and fall away into the Second Death (Heb. 10:29). Such we understand to be the Lord's sentence upon antitypical Korah, from whom we exhort the Lord's people to withdraw both priestly and brotherly fellowship. (2 John 10, 11.) With such we are not to eat—partake of the teachings that they set forth (1 Cor. 5:11). 

(26) Question: When does the cleansing of the crown-losers begin? 

Answer: It has been going on in individuals all through the Gospel Age, and that often in the pertinent spots shortly after the spotting of their robes set in its various forms of evil. E.g., the incestuous brother at Corinth (1 Cor. 5) was by his experience at Azazel's hands soon cleansed of that gross sin (2 Cor. 2:4-11). From this example we conclude that all crown-losers who during the Gospel Age have been accounted worthy to attain life experienced their cleansing from

The Epiphany's Elect. 

146 

sin, selfishness and worldliness during this life. So, also, during the Epiphany there has been a cleansing going on in individuals from almost the outstart of their spotting of their garments. But there has been no class cleansing of the Great Company yet. This will set in, we believe, before very long, very shortly after the 60th post has been set up, which seems to be in the not distant future. 

(27) Question: Wherein does the cleansing of the crown-losers consist? 

Answer: Properly and clearly to answer this question we must distinguish between several things: (1) between the things in them that must be cleansed; and (2) between individual cleansings up to the time of their class cleansings and their class cleansings as such. There are two distinct classes of things from which crown-losers must be cleansed: (1) sin, selfishness and worldliness, and (2) error. Crown-losers as individuals up to the time that crown-losers as a class obtain their cleansing, have had to be purified from the first set of things, i.e., sin, selfishness and worldliness; for if they would not in this life have been cleansed from these in the sense of overcoming them, they would have to die the second death. But this class of crown-losers do not necessarily in this life have to cleanse themselves from the second set of things, i.e., errors; for if this had been the requirement, the vast bulk of the crown-losers would have died the second death, e.g., the various crown-losers who all through the Age died in Babylonian errors, the spy-members of both Harvests, and the bulk of the crown-losers in the Epiphany Levite groups, who have died without getting the Epiphany Truth. Almost all of the just-mentioned kinds of crown-losers died without getting the meat in due season, and would thus have gone into the second death, if as a part of their cleansing God had required them to get rid in this life of their errors and accept the Truth due in their times. Hence for the saving of their lives God has required of them merely

Generalities on the Great Company. 

147 

to cleanse themselves in this life from the spots on their garments consisting of sin, selfishness and worldliness. The time of the cleansing of such from error and of their getting the Truth as due will be after their resurrection as spirits (Rev. 7:17). This view of the twofold cleansing of such crown-losers is necessary, or we would have to conclude that all crown-losers who did not in this life get the cleansing of both sets of evils above-mentioned died the second death, which would put the vast bulk of these into the second death. But the case will be different with the class cleansing of the crown-losers, which is to set in shortly after the 60th Epiphany post is erected. They will have to cleanse themselves from their errors and accept the Parousia and Epiphany Truth, as well as overcome their sins, selfishness and worldliness. That they will have to overcome their errors in this life is evident from the fact that, until their cleansing from both sets of evils shall have made at least a large beginning, they will not be able to minister to the Priests (Num. 8:7, 21, first and second clauses, 22, 13-19). And as a part of their cleansing, i.e., that which must be made Godward, "before God," as distinct from their personally effecting their own part in the cleansing process pointed out in Num. 8:7, 21 (first and second clauses), they will have to undergo the washing in the blood of the Lamb (Rev. 7:14), which is typed in Num. 8:8, 12, 21, last clause. If thus we keep in mind the distinctions between (1) the two sets of evils from which the Levites must be cleansed, and (2) the individual cleansings before the class cleansings begin, and the class cleansings as such, we will as above outlined have proper and clear answers to the several phases in the question just answered. 

‍

BEREAN QUESTIONS

(1) What is the first elect class of the Epiphany? How will it be discussed? What is it called in Joel 2:29? In Rev. 7:9; 19:6; 19:1? To what were its individuals originally invited? How do the cited passages prove this? What happened to them because of unfaithfulness? What 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

148 

does Ps. 107:10, 11 teach of them? 1 Cor. 5; Jude 23; Rev. 7:14? Heb. 2:15; Jude 22? 2 Tim. 4:10; Jas. 1:8? 1 Cor. 3:12, 15; Matt. 25:3, 8? 1 Cor. 3:3, 4; Matt. 7:26; 1 Tim. 1:19, 20? Is. 66:5? Heb. 2:14, 15? 1 Cor. 5:5; 1 Tim. 1:20; Matt. 7:27; 1 Cor. 3:15? 1 Cor. 3:15; Heb. 2:15; Jude 22, 23; Phil. 3:14? Cant. 5:6, 7; Matt. 25:11, 12, 30? Rev. 7:14? Cant. 5:9—6:1; Rev. 19:6? Ps. 45:14, 15; 1 Cor. 5:5; Rev. 19:9? Heb. 12:23; Rev. 7:15; Ezek. 44:10-14? When in the Gospel Age do they come into special prominence? When is the time of their and the Little Flock's development? During which two of its periods? 

(2) In general, of how many classes does God's plan treat? What are some of the contrasting designations of these two classes? To what is an understanding of these necessary? What kind of a lesson may the distinction between them be called? How are they distinguished as to numbers? As to ways of travel? As to conditions? As to promises? As to final homes? As to resurrection? As to final nature? 

(3) Why is salvation not limited to these two classes? What is the first of these other classes? In how many of this book's chapters will these be treated? In this matter what are we not to understand? How is this proven and taught in Eph. 4:4? How many salvations have been offered during this Age to those who turn to God? What has God offered these? On what condition? How does Rev. 2:10 prove this? What makes some lose the high calling salvation? What is their attitude toward God and righteousness? What do they later do? How do the cited Scriptures prove these three lines of thought? Of what do they fail? In their extremity what does God do for them? What does He propose to make them? By what does He do this? What is the pertinent record? 

(4) Wherein lies the possibility of there being a Great Company? What four lines of thought prove the possibility of there being a Great Company? How in each line of thought do the cited passages prove it? What two conclusions flow from the fourth of these lines of thought? What would follow as to the Great Company, if all who have lost their crowns were to become Second Deathers? What proves another than the high calling salvation to be operating? What follows from the fact that there is

Generalities on the Great Company. 

149 

a Great Company? Of whom does the Great Company consist? For what are they not good enough? For what are they good enough? For what are they too good? 

(5) How did the individuals start out who later became of this class? What two facts prove this? How do the cited passages prove these two facts? What was not the cause of their failing to gain the prize? Why not? Why was it? How do the cited passages prove these two reasons? What did they receive when complying with the terms of justification and consecration? How do the cited passages prove this? What did the Lord send them? How do the cited passages prove this? When have such brethren existed? How do the cited passages prove this? 

(6) What has not been the character of their course toward the Lord, the Truth and the brethren? What have been the variations of their unfaithfulness? What have existed between these two extremes? What has been the trouble with some of these bound brethren? Whom did they not imitate? To what have others of them given themselves up? What characterizes all of them as a class? In what respects do they fail? 

(7) For what does this condition unfit them? What nine reasons prove this? What different procedures mark God's dealings with the Little Flock and the Great Company? How does the stumbling-block of their iniquity affect them? As to worldliness? Selfishness? Sin? Error? How do life's experiences affect them? What do they lose? What does this mean? How do the cited passages prove this? What is the contrasted experience of the Faithful? How do the cited passages prove this? 

(8) What kind of individuals has there been throughout the Gospel Age? What proves this? When are these first treated as a class? How does the tabernacle picture show this? At what time are there more individuals of this kind than at other times? Among other passages, where is this class described? What response, according to Cant. 5, do they first make to the Bridegroom's call? At long last on responding what do they meet? Why? How does Matt. 25:8-12 show this? When enlightened and witnessing, what do they experience? Becoming zealous after enlightenment, to whom especially will they preach? With what result? How does Cant. 5:8—6:3 show this? Through what must they pass? What will 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

150 

they accomplish therein? What message will they then proclaim? Despite their sorrows and sufferings, what will they do? Why? How does Rev. 19:6-8 show this? What will their spirits experience? How do 1 Cor. 5:5; 2 Cor. 5:17 prove this? Of what in heaven will they partake? How do the cited passages prove this? What will they then be privileged to do? As what, from the temple picture? From the kingdom picture? How do the cited passages prove this? What will then be their experiences in contrast with those of the present? How does Rev. 7:15-17 prove this? What will they have lost in their saved condition? 

(9) What will be here presented? In how many groups? Of what does the first group of Scriptures consist? The second? What does each one of the first group of passages mean? The second? 

(10) What, in the first place, should be done after a careful study of these passages? If one find himself to be a new creature, what, in the second place, should he seek to learn? What is required properly to answer these questions aright? Who will supply it? What may those desiring information on these and other Biblical subjects do to obtain it? 

(11) What have the brethren in past years done as to Lev. 12? What has until lately been the answer received by them? Why was this so? Why has it lately become understood? What does a right understanding of Lev. 12 prove? 

(12) What furnished the key to the understanding of Lev. 12? What does Rachel type? How may this be otherwise stated? What should be said of the definition of the Rachel type as given in P '23, 117, par. 5? What is the specific definition as to the antitype of the birth of Joseph and Benjamin? How can this definition be harmonized with the antitype of Jacob in these transactions? What does the mother in Lev. 12 type? How can we prove that the servants of the pertinent truths are a part of the antitypical mother? 

(13) How are the Little Flock and the Great Company sometimes, in contrast, typed? In harmony with what Biblical usage is this? Cite an example of such a type. What do the male child and the female child of Lev. 12 type? What is a type almost parallel with this one?

Generalities on the Great Company. 

151 

What were the periods of purification for the mother of a son and the mother of a daughter? What is typed by these periods? What is typed by the purifying of the mother of a son? By her purification in the birth of a daughter? 

(14) In what activities have the faithful and the measurably faithful servants of the Truth shared? How are they to be considered in the type as differentiated in respect to the double cleansing? What necessitates this distinction? What is typed in the first sense of the antitype in both cases by the full purification of the mother? What is typed by the progressiveness of the purification? Whose is the antitypical purifying work? Explain the Scriptures proving this. Explain how Prov. 4:18 shows the gradualness of the cleansing of the Truth. 

(15) What is yet unknown as to the work typed by the mother bringing the sacrifices 80 days after a daughter's birth? What is typed as to work by the sacrifice of the mother 40 days after a son's birth? What did that work attest? How so? What did their service therein not merit? What proves this? What was typed by the mother's burnt offering and sin offering? How is the antitypical mother's faith typed? What is typed by the priest's offering the typical sacrifices? What is typed by the fact that, not a bullock, but a pigeon or turtle dove was offered as the sin offering? What is typed in the varying value of the burnt offering? What set of antitypical sacrificers did Mary's burnt offering prove her to type? Give several examples of the other set. 

(16) How long was the mother unclean in her separation after the birth of a son? After the birth of a daughter? What gives us the clue to the antitype? What is the antitype of the seven days' uncleanness? Of the fourteen days' uncleanness? When did these respective imputations take place? Why is the pertinent set of class servants excluded from the picture of the other? What is probably suggested by the numbers 33 and 66 for the days following the end of the uncleanness in the pertinent cases? Why? 

(17) What is suggested by the above study? What is the first of these? Please give the first proof for this. The second. The third. The fourth. The fifth. The sixth. The seventh. 

The Epiphany's Elect. 

152 

(18) What is the second lesson suggested by the chronology shown in Lev. 12 connected with the antitypical sacrifice of the mother after her purification? Describe the period of about two years and one month following October, 1914, as to its Little Flock work. In what kind of time is this period given? How so? What does this period suggest as to an antitype of the mother's sacrifice after the 80 days? What parallel things are thereby suggested? What interlappings are thus indicated? 

(19) What is the third lesson suggested by the purification completed in 40 days? What does this imply as to the Little Flock Truth as left by our Pastor? What does this imply as to the Levitical teachers' repudiating his teachings and substituting contradictory ones in their stead? What other Scripture suggests the full purification of the Little Flock by October, 1914? Explain how it does so. What does this prove as to that evil servant's pertinent claims? What is the character of Levitical teachings on Little Flock matters contrary to such teachings as left with the Church by our Pastor? Why so? Who is the author and who are his agents as to such contrary teachings? What should we say to their teachers? Why should we so speak? 

(20) What fourth lesson is implied in Lev. 12:2, 4, 5 and Mal. 3:3, first clause? In what fact is this lesson implied? What did not happen with the Truth as our Pastor gave it during the 40 years? How was the pertinent work done? Give some examples of his purging the Truth from errors during these years and his setting it forth without errors. What should his mistakes not arouse in us? Why not? What teachings are we not to expect him to have purged from all errors? Why not? What illustrative examples apply in this connection? 

(21) How does this apply to the teachings as to the Great Company in so far as they are Epiphaniac? What two features do we see herein operating? How have they been unfolding? How may they be expected to continue to unfold? How long will it last? For what does this principle account? What should it not arouse in us? To what should it arouse us Christward and toward the Parousia and Epiphany messengers? From what should it deter us as to these latter? How should it move us to regard the Lord in His relations to His servants and them in theirs to us?

‍