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


Believers. The first pouring of the water represents these four truths taught by the Lutheran Reformation (v. 33); the second, the same truths taught by the Zwinglian Reformation; and the third, the same truths taught by the Episcopal (the English, but not Henry the Eighth's) Reformation led by Thomas Cranmer (v. 34).


(23) These teachings covered and surrounded the True Church (altar) and were found everywhere in the Bible (the trench). The prayer of Elijah represents the ardent and confident longings, evidenced by their reformatory labors, on the part of the Faithful for a true reformation, and for the conversion of the people to Jehovah (vs. 36, 37). Through the real Reformation that was effected, Jehovah manifested that He accepted the sacrificed humanity of the Faithful (the bullock), the Scriptural passages and the arguments (the wood) used, the True Church (altar), the teachings of the four cardinal principles of the Reformers (the four barrels of water) and the historical testimonies cited for corroboration (the dust) (v. 38). Almost entire Europe was converted to Protestantism and against Clericalism, Baal worship; and had it not been for the intrigues and frauds of the Jesuits, and more especially for the violence of the "Holy" Inquisition and of Catholic armies and mobs, apparently all Europe would have been converted, and would have remained converted to Protestantism (v. 39). The sacrificing was over before 1618.


(24) Additional to the constructive [sacrificial] work of the reformers, they did a simultaneous destructive work in the religious controversies of those times. The Faithful called on all to require of the clericalistic teachers of Rome that they face the questions in controversy, by which course the latter were captured. Kishon (crooked) represents the crooked course of Romish errors, by refutation of which the Faithful with the sword of the Spirit "slew" the anti-



typical prophets of Baal (v. 40). The beginning of the antitype of this verse starts with the Reformation and progresses for a hundred years.


(25) The (very limited) circulation of the Bible from 1517 to 1619 was the "sound [indication] of abundance of rain." The Bible, so circulated, was appealed to by antitypical Elijah as a warrant that the civil power (Ahab) could appropriate (eat and drink) to itself from the usurping Papacy its own proper powers as marked out in the Bible (v. 41). And the civil rulers acted on this principle, as the history of Europe abundantly proves, since shortly after the Reformation began. While this began almost with the Reformation, it greatly increased as a result of the Thirty Years' War, 1618-1648. Elijah's going up to the top of Carmel types the Elijah class seeking the acme of fruitfulness from a spread of Bibles; and their ardent prayers for it are typed in the last part of v. 42. The beginnings of the antitypes of this verse, including the first part of the antitypical Elijah's prayer, carry us back to the Reformation's beginning.


(26) The Reformation, as we know was "a Reformation by sects." Hence Sectarians served antitypical Elijah, and are typed by Elijah's servant. In all there were seven Reformations by sects from about 1525-1799, typed by the sevenfold going of Elijah's servant to see if there was prospect of rain (vs. 43, 44). They were the following: (1) Lutheran, (2) Presbyterian, (3) Baptist, (4) Unitarian, (5) Episcopalian, (6) Congregational and (7) Methodist. Five of them started between 1525 and 1560; hence the antitype of' these verses begins almost with the Reformation's start. The Quaker movement is ignored because of its disparaging the Bible.


(27) Vs. 43-46 help us to locate the period of the rain by pointing out events that preceded and followed it. To publish Bibles, unsanctioned by the Papacy, was an act of rebels (the sea) in Rome's eyes. Hence it



was only from this symbolic sea that a promise of a rain of Bibles could come. Hence antitypical Elijah told Denominationists to look for Bibles to come from those who revolted against Rome's arrangements as to the circulation of the Bible. The seventh time of the servant's going and looking occurred in the Methodist Movement, which began, not as Vol. VII teaches, in 1728 (in which year Wesley was ordained as an Episcopal Minister and thereafter for ten years labored as such in that Church, in harmony with its principles and arrangements); but in 1738, when he was "converted," and began the movement that developed in a number of years into Methodism. The "little cloud" (v. 44) represents (Rev. 14: 14) the troublous teachings of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity as opposed to Kingcraft, etc., emanating from the illuministic and revolutionistic agitators of France before and during the French Revolution, 1748-1804, and resulting under the Lord's Providence in helping antitypical Elijah (Rev. 12: 15, 16). These troublous and partly true teachings were an expression of human power (like a man's hand), against Papacy's errors, and gave promise of full power from the Bible teachings ("the clouds," v. 45) on true Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. By these two sets of teachings the Papal Ecclesiastical powers (heaven, v. 45) were completely overshadowed. Antitypical Elijah through the Methodist Church, which at first was a Christian Liberty, Equality and Fraternity movement against the Church of England, told the Civil Powers to prepare for the shaking that would occur in Church and State, as a result of the truths that the illuministic and revolutionistic agitators were proclaiming; and thus prepared the Civil Powers in a measure against the shock that the French Revolution gave, when it broke like a tidal wave upon the shores of Society (v. 44). While both the French Illuminists' and Revolutionists' teachings ("little cloud") on natural Liberty, Equality and Fraternity



with their outworkings in the French Revolution and Napoleonic wars (the little cloud's part of the wind); and while the true Bible teachings on Christian Liberty, Equality and Fraternity ("clouds") with their outworkings, the war (the "clouds'" part of the wind) against Rome's binding the Bible, darkened with trouble the Papal powers (heavens); the downpour of Bibles (rain) occurred, through the Bible Societies formed especially from 1804 to 1816, coming as a result of the Bible teachings laden with trouble to Rome (clouds) and their accompanying war (wind) on Rome's prohibition of the Bible. This combination of events: (1) the contentions and acts of the French Illuminists, Revolutionists and Militarists on Liberty, Equality and Fraternity against Priestcraft, Kingcraft, Aristocracy, etc., (2) the true teachings of the Bible on those subjects, and their resultant war against Rome's prohibition of the Bible, forced the civil powers organized in a concert of nations (the chariot), before the rain came, to give their unfriendly attention (rode and went) to the subject of the union between Church and State (Jezreel, [nominal] seed of God, the mutual dwelling place of Ahab and Jezebel); with the result that they did not even invite the Pope to participate in the peace conference at Vienna following Napoleon's final defeat, 1815, which act shows the reality of the modern estrangement between Church and State (v. 45). As might be expected antitypical Elijah by faithful service in teaching (girding up his loins), especially in the Methodist Church, preceded the civil powers in giving unfriendly attention to the Union of Church and State, much to Papacy's chagrin (v. 46).


(28) It will be noticed that we agree with Brother Olson that the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars were connected with the downpour of Bibles. But the connection was that of an occasion, and not that of a cause or source. Our explanation refers to these



events as included in the "little cloud" and its share of the "wind." He does not mention the Illuministic agitations and the consequent Revolutionistic agitations at all, the former of which we think were the "little cloud" when first seen, which of course grew larger in the revolutionistic agitations. Montesquieu's book on the "Spirit of the Law" published 1748 was the foundation of these Illuministic agitations. Voltaire, Rousseau and many others contributed to the little cloud, which is otherwise spoken of as the flood out of the Serpent's mouth. But the antitypical "clouds" and their share of the "wind" were the real source of the downpour—a thing not mentioned by Brother Olson at all. One thing is sure that the downpour of Bibles came not from, out of, the French Revolution and Napoleon's wars, but from, out of, the Christian teachings on true Liberty, Equality and Fraternity starting in the Methodist movement, and the agitation for the spread of Bibles, a war against Rome's stand on the same. It will be noticed that the text says that not only the "clouds" but the "wind" also darkened the heavens. It must have been a wind like those of our Western tornadoes, clouds of wind, moving very rapidly.


(29) Let us now consider the story of how the first impulse was given to start Bible Societies which spread the Scriptures, as a generous rain, out of the clouds of Bible Truth on true Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. In each of the seven reform movements, typed by the sevenfold quest of Elijah's servant, the effort was to obtain a wide circulation of the Bible; but the effort failed until after the last of the seven, Methodism, was inaugurated. A Welsh Methodist Minister, Mr. Charles of Bala, and a Welsh Methodist damsel, Mary Jones of Llanfihangel, were the agencies that the Lord used to give the impetus to the movement. This damsel, born 1784, was poor, bright and pious, and had from childhood intensely longed for a



Bible, a thing which was then very scarce in Wales. At ten she began to save the money that was given to, or earned by her, and that other children would have spent for sweets, in order that she might buy a Bible. She saved everything that she could get for six years, always keeping her purpose in view, when at length she had enough for her Bible! What poverty that required rigid saving for six years to buy a Bible! And, glorious thought, what devotion! She had heard that Mr. Charles of Bala, 25 miles away, was selling Bibles. In the Spring of 1800, barefooted, this consecrated maiden, filled with the most intense longings ("Elijah prayed earnestly") for a Bible, walked 25 miles to Bala to buy one. But Mr. Charles' stock was all sold, except a few copies already promised to others; and the publishers of Welsh Bibles had gone out of business! She broke down in tears of disappointment at the news. But her tears plead more strongly than her words. Mr. Charles let her have one of those that he had promised to another; and joyful beyond the power of words to describe, bare-footed she walked 25 miles back to her home. "The famine of Bibles," emphasized by this incident, which, being continually in his mind, suggested the idea of a Bible Society to him, prompted Mr. Charles to seek to organize such a Society for exclusive publication of the Scriptures. In the Fall of 1802 at a Tract Society's meeting held in London, Mr. Charles gave point to his plea for a Bible Society by telling the story of Mary Jones and her Bible. The audience was electrified by the Bible spirit of the true Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, seen in Mary Jones and Mr. Charles. The story was incorporated in a tract pleading for Bibles for the whole world, and aroused a powerful movement throughout Britain and later in other lands for Biblical Liberty, Equality and Fraternity implied in a spread of Bibles, the antitype of the "clouds and wind," which led first to the formation of the British and Foreign Bible Society,



1804, and then to that of other Bible Societies. "Despise not the day of small things!" Thus through this humble, consecrated Methodist damsel, and through this humble, consecrated Methodist Minister, a movement was started that led to the formation of vast Bible Societies, and to the spread of Bibles or parts thereof by the hundreds of millions in over nine hundred languages broadcast throughout the earth! The Bible is the torch of true Liberty, Equality and Fraternity; and its emancipation, especially from 1804 onward, has made impossible the Absolutism of the Papacy over the Modern World! Praised be our God for this great blessing!


(30) Above we noted the fact that the antitypical "third year" was from 1259 to 1619, during which the antitype of 1 Kings 18: 1-40 took place. It will further be noticed that Jas. 5: 17 tells us that the drought lasted 3 1/2 years, and that immediately after this period (v. 18) the rain came. In the record of 1 Kings 18: 1-40 and 41-46 apart from v. 1 the time element is not mentioned, but the duration of the events in 1 Kings 18 was about a year and a half; for we know from the Bible that in the antitype it was about a symbolic year and a half. In the type the events at the foot of Carmel (vs. 20-40), seem to have occurred the day before the rain as the following facts would prove. On account of the drought the sacrifice must have been near the sea, because of getting the four barrels of water three times in quick succession. After 3:00 P. M., "the time of the evening sacrifice," building the second altar, digging the trench, killing the second bullock, cutting it into pieces, taking and leading the 450 prophets of Baal to Kishon, several miles North of Carmel, their execution by one person and the return to the foot of Carmel occupied considerable time. The top, the highest part, of Carmel, 1742 feet high, was 9 1/2 miles Southeast of the foot of the Mountain at the Sea. Elijah under the circumstances



could not have climbed up to this point before dark. Hence the events on the Mountain top, requiring objects to be visible at least 6 miles away, the shortest distance to the Sea, must have been at least the day after the sacrificing at the Mountain's foot.


(31) Lack of space will force us to be brief in our comments on Elijah in 1 Kings 19: 1-21. Vs. 1 and 2 type Papacy's anger (certain Protestant clergy, especially in the Church of England, showed the same spirit) at the Reform work culminating in the downpour of Bibles. This anger was occasioned by the Civil Powers' unfriendly course toward the union of State and Church, which convinced the Papacy that the State favored some of antitypical Elijah's principles and acts. This anger reached its culmination in the anathemas against "The Pestiferous Bible Societies" from 1816 to 1825. (B-321, 322.) The flight of v. 3 began, therefore, between 1816 and 1825. Through the Stone movement which began 1804, and which rejected the idea of denominations, sectarianists (Elijah's servant) were dismissed. Henceforth the true Church kept itself clear of them as a servant. Without the creeds it was content with the Bible (Beer-sheba, well of the oath), which Barton Stone and Thomas Campbell claimed as the only creed. The isolatedness and despondency of God's saints until the Miller movement are typed in v. 4. Elsewhere we will sufficiently expound vs. 5-8, whose antitypes bring us to 1914. With v. 9, as we saw several times in the preceding chapter the antitype goes back, and follows another set of pictures, each picture being given to a completion, and not being completely antityped before the next is antitypically begun. The cave scene (vs. 9, 10) we understand to represent the condition of disappointment and chagrin on the part of the brethren, 1844, 1845, incidental to the failure of their expectation in re the Lord's return. Amid this experience the Lord began to give the brethren an understanding of



the great tribulation and the coming kingdom (vs. 11, 12). They began to come out of their disappointment toward 1846, when the Lord began to commission them to teach and empower (anoint) Elisha. That year the anointing of antitypical Elisha began. In the antitype the time order of the three commissions (vs. 15, 16) seems to be changed; for, as we will show, antitypical Elisha's anointing began before 1874 (2 Kings 2: 1), while the anointing of the others ended by 1932, and antitypical Elijah was after 1874 commissioned to do it. The rest of the chapter we will elsewhere explain, except the 12 yoke of oxen, which we believe represent the humanity of antitypical Elisha in the twelve tribes of Nominal Spiritual Israel (Num. 17: 2, 3), in all of which were some antitypical Levites. The latters' humanity the antitypical Elisha sacrificed to follow antitypical Elijah (v. 21). It was his own humanity; the difference of expression is due to the use of different types.


(32) Here we may well consider those facts connected with antitypical Elijah's anointing antitypical Elisha. The first of these facts is God's making known to antitypical Elijah that he was to anoint antitypical Elisha to be prophet in his stead, i.e., train him to become God's mouthpiece to the world, when the time would come for antitypical Elijah to cease from such mouthpieceship. This anointing was given antitypical Elisha through antitypical Elijah's associating the former with himself in the office powers of his work, symbolized by Elijah's casting his mantle over Elisha. In the following providential way the Lord indicated to Bro. Miller as the then leader of the Elijah class that antitypical Elijah should associate antitypical Elisha with him in the exercise of his office powers: Bro. Miller and the other most prominent Elijah leaders were becoming old and infirm; and their age and infirmities were the providential indication that they put some of the burden of the work upon younger



and stronger shoulders. On this point Bro. Miller, in his booklet, Apology and Defense, written in July, 1845, speaks as follows: "My labors are principally ended. I shall leave to my younger brethren the task of contending for the Truth [italics ours]. Many years I toiled alone. God has now raised up those who will fill my place. I shall not cease to pray for the spread of the Truth." [White's Life of Wm. Miller, page 373.] How do we know that these younger men for the most part were crown-losing new creatures? We answer: Shortly after Bro. Miller's death they proceeded to make a sect of Adventists and, as the Prince of Adventism, gave the corrections [charger], refutations [bowl] and instructions in righteousness [spoon] pertinent to the Second Advent Chronology.


(33) The second fact is the act by which antitypical Elijah cast his mantle upon antitypical Elisha. We will point out how Bro. Miller performed his part in the antitype as an example of how his assisting Little Flock brethren may have performed their part in the antitype. We will quote from pages 386 and 387 of White's Life of Wm. Miller: "On the 8th of September [1846], Mr. Miller commenced a [lecturing] tour into Canada. He went by way of Lake Champlain to Burlington, Vt., where he preached in the evening of that day. There he met Elder Buckley, who accompanied him on his tour. From this place he went to Essex, Vt., where Mr. M. gave two discourses. On the 12th they commenced a two days' meeting in Cambridge, Vt., where there was a good attendance. On Tuesday the 15th, they commenced a meeting in Montgomery, Vt., which continued over the following Sabbath, Mr. Miller generally preaching twice a day. While in this place he was taken by a severe pain in one of his toes. He was soon relieved of that, when the pain commenced in his left shoulder. He then desired to return home, but was persuaded to continue his journey. On the 22nd he gave two discourses in



South Troy, Vt. The meeting was held in a large hall which had formerly been used for a ball room. While he was preaching in the evening, the windows were pelted with eggs, clubs, stones, thrown by some rude fellows of the baser sort, who were outside of the building. Some of their missiles entered the room. One stone about the size of a hen's egg struck the desk in front of Mr. Miller, where he was speaking … The audience was somewhat agitated; but he requested them to be quiet, and proceeded with his discourse. No one was injured and good evidently resulted from the interruption; for it aroused the old gentleman's energy, and gave additional interest to the remainder of the sermon. On Thursday, the 24th of September [September 24, 1846, is the date indicated at the foot of the Pyramid's large step], they commenced a conference [corresponding to a convention among us] at Derby Line, Vt., which continued four days. The pain in Mr. M.'s shoulder had increased considerably and resulted in a tumor of considerable size, which was much inflamed. Yet he preached six times [in the four days] with a good degree of vigor." In this quotation all italics are ours. We, by them, are emphasizing certain points pertinent to our subject. It will be noted (1) that Elder Buckley was his companion and fellow worker on this trip; (2) that on September 24-27 (four days) they commenced a conference or convention at Derby Line, Vt.; (3) that at Montgomery between September 15 and 21 Bro. Miller became sick; (4) that this sickness increased, resulting in a tumor of considerable size; (5) that this decreased the number of times he was expected to preach, so that he preached only six times while his usual program required it to be done eight times; (6) that this increased the number of times that Elder Buckley had to preach, he taking over the two sermons that Bro. Miller otherwise would have preached; and (7) that as a result Bro. Miller gave Bro. Buckley



some of his work to do—i.e., associated him with him in his work. By so doing, Bro. Miller as the Elijah leader cast antitypical Elijah's mantle on a representative of antitypical Elisha. Thus we see how the anointing of antitypical Elisha began.


(34) As for the third act—antitypical of Elisha's drawing back somewhat when Elijah cast his mantle over him, we must conclude that in some way in the case at hand, as a representative of the Elisha class, Elder Buckley allowed some selfish sentiment ["kiss my father and mother" as against the thought expressed in the words, "forget thy father's house"—selfishness] to prompt him to hold back in sacrificing as faithfully as he should have done in the opportunities offered him by Bro. Miller's infirmities forcing him to put some of his labor on Bro. Buckley; and in the latter's so holding back, he kissed his father and mother—rendered some allegiance to selfishness. Bro. Buckley selfishly allowed sick Bro. Miller to preach too often, relieving him only twice, whereas had he been filled with sacrificing love, he would have taken more of the burden off the sick man's shoulders. Of course, there were others than Bro. Miller and Bro. Buckley involved in these three antitypes; but all of them showed the spirit of the classes to which they belonged.


(35) We have not space to review the absurd and unfactual explanation that Bro. Olson offers on Naboth, whom he claims types the Parousia Truth, and his vineyard, which he claims types the Truth people (1 Kings 21), further than to remark that the scene was antityped in the persecution of the French Huguenots, at the instigation of the Roman Catholic Church through the prearranged false witness of the French Clergy and Nobility in the supposed interests of the civil power, which coveted the privileges of these Protestants. The latter for many years had a subordinate government of their own (vineyard) in France, which they refused to relinquish. The whole



antitype was fulfilled some time before 1700. Nor have we space to review his equally absurd and unfactual explanation of Ahab's two battles with the Syrians (1 Kings 20) further than offering the key to the chapter, whereby the real antitype and the erroneousness of his explanation can be readily recognized. Here the Syrians represent the Radicals. Those who several centuries ago were considered Radicals are now considered Conservatives; for the radical Socialists, Communists, Anarchists, etc., in their opposition to the Present Order, even in its Democracy, are now the antitypical Syrians. But centuries ago, when Autocracy (antitypical Ahab) reigned in the State (Samaria), Democracy was radical. The first battle (1 Kings 20: 1-21) represents the centuries-long conflict between the hosts of Italian Democracy (antitypical Ben-hadad) and European Autocracy (antitypical Ahab), resulting in the complete triumph of the latter over the former. This triumph was complete about the beginning of the Reformation. The antitypical second battle (1 Kings 20: 23-34) was the effort of Democratic Holland, 1572-1650, and Democratic England, 1642-1688, to overthrow Autocracy (antitypical Ahab), which effort ended in failure. And because Autocracy through its course connected with the Wars of the Spanish Succession, 1692-1697, 1704-1712, compromised its victory by large concessions to Democracy in these two countries, its doom at the latter's hand was predicted by statesmen of Autocratic lands.—1 Kings 20: 35-43.


(36) 1 Kings 22: 1-40 types the conflict between the Radicals (the antitypical Syrians), especially the French Revolutionists and Autocracy (antitypical Ahab) supported by Aristocracy, especially in Britain (antitypical Jehoshaphat). The prophets that deceived the King represent the political, educational, clerical, aristocratic, social and financial mouthpieces of Autocracy that misled it, partly as represented in the Holy



Roman Empire, into warring with the Radicals of Europe, particularly those in Republican France. Micaiah represents the liberal class of European statesmen of which Charles Fox, the British Statesman, one of the greatest debaters and orators that ever lived, was a leader, which first halfheartedly consented to participation in the war on Revolutionary France, etc., which later advised against it, predicting defeat to Autocracy, and which as a result fell into the latter's disfavor. Zedekiah, the son of Chenaanah (commerce), represents those diplomats like William Pitt, the Younger, who welded with finances the autocratic nations of Europe into what seemed an irresistible alliance of powers (iron horns) against Democratic France, etc. During the conflict Autocracy was defeated (Ahab wounded) at the hands of venturesome Napoleon (the man who at a venture drew the bow), and the Holy Roman Empire was destroyed, 1806 (Ahab carried out of the battle). Autocracy as a result was very greatly weakened, being compelled about the middle of the century, through the revolutions of 1848 and later events, to begin to grant a constitution and the ballot to almost every nation of Europe not previously having these. By this course Autocracy died. Yea, the change has become so general that Democracy is now no more considered radical. Now the radical Socialists, the Communists, the Syndicalists and the Anarchists are the antitypical Syrians. Thus, whereas formerly Democracy was antitypical Ben-hadad (the view of 1 Kings) latterly in the European political world, Bolshevism became this antitype (the view of certain parts of 2 Kings).


(37) A brief statement of the antitype of 1 Kings 21: 1728 is in place here. When Autocracy (Ahab) in the person of Louis XIV of France took possession of the Huguenots' domain (the vineyard) after suppressing them (killing Naboth), the pertinent principles of the Lord's Word (the Word of the Lord)



aroused the faithful Little Flock (Elijah vs. 17-19) to encounter and denounce Autocracy for its wrongs against the Huguenots, particularly against their Little Flock representatives, forecasting its destruction at the hands of partisans (dogs). These denunciations came especially, but not exclusively from Little Flock members in England, whither many of the Huguenots fled for refuge, though some found it also in Holland, Switzerland, Germany and even in America, in which countries also members of antitypical Elijah joined in these denunciations of France's Autocracy as against the Huguenots. While Autocracy charged these denunciations to the alleged personal hatred (mine enemy) of antitypical Elijah, it was actually due to Autocracy's wickedness against the Lord (v. 21). Antitypical Elijah also forecast the overthrow of every political system that would smack of Autocracy (posterity), with all false teachers who defiled its powers (wall), regardless as to whether these were more or less restrained (shut up) or free (left, at large), reducing such systems to the condition of the destroyed wicked kingdoms of the past, and this as an expression of God's wrath against Autocracy (v. 22). He also forecast the destruction of the Romanist Church (Jezebel) at the hands of partisans (dogs, v. 23), while she would be entrenched in the powers of a union of Church and State (walls of Jezreel, the dwelling place of Ahab and Jezebel). Partisans (dogs) would destroy Autocracy's supporters in governmental power (city), and anarchists (fowls) would destroy them when their governmental powers would be no more (field, v. 24). The evil deeds of Autocracy are typically characterized in vs. 25, 26. Antitypical Elijah's denunciations of Autocracy in France roused it to a measurable repentance (v. 27), which through the principles of God's Word occasioned antitypical Elijah both to recognize it and to recognize from the Bible that the remnants of Autocracy would not be



destroyed during Autocracy's days; but in its successor's days—the days of allianced Europe typed by Jehoram, Ahab's son (vs. 28, 29). 1 Kings 22: 41-48 treats of Democracy—liberty-loving America from about 1860 until 1919. The destruction of many of America's merchant ships through the U-boat warfare from 1914 to 1917 is typed in v. 48, and its refusal to join hands with the European nations while acting in their individual capacities, as against Germany, before it entered the war, is typed in v. 49.


(38) Next will be given the antitype of 2 Kings 1, from the understanding that it was fulfilled just before, and during that part of the World War which was before "that Servant" passed beyond the vail. But before discussing these matters we feel that we ought to refute some errors on antitypical Elijah that J. F. Rutherford preached at the Cedar Point Convention and later published in the Tower (Z '22, 334). In the same article the darkening of his right eye and his eating and drinking with the drunken (Zech. 11: 15-17; Matt. 24: 48-51) are seen in his denying that the day of preparation began in 1799, and in his teaching instead that it began in 1874 (see C 23 for the refutation); in his denying that our Lord came to His temple in 1874 and in his alleging instead that it was in 1918 (for the refutation please see Jesus' and Mark's use of the pertinent passage as fulfilling in 29 A.D., and therefore, according to the parallel dispensations, also in 1874 as our Pastor properly explained the subject (Matt. 11: 10; Luke 7: 27; Mark 1: 28); and in teaching that Isaiah's vision (Is. 6: 1-11) of his offering his service, his lip-cleansing and his instructions for his mission, treats of matters from 1919 onward, utterly ignoring the fact that beginning with Marsiglio's work, 1309-1328, progressing through the reformation by sects and culminating in a nucleus of the sanctuary class becoming cleansed in 1846, the Church was given a part of the lip-cleansing for its mission of



declaring the things stated in Is. 6: 8-13, and utterly ignoring the fact that John (John 12: 40, 41) quotes Is. 6: 10 and applies it to the Jewish Harvest and that therefore, according to the parallel dispensations, it applies from 1874 to 1914, until the Time of Trouble, when the time for the wasting of the cities, etc., came. These and other errors, apart from the errors on Elijah, contained in Z '22, 332-337, we will not further discuss here.


(39) In Z '22, 334, J. F. Rutherford sets forth the thought that the Elijah antitype did not begin to fulfill until 1874 and was completed in 1918. With his usual hypocrisy, while elaborating his "new view" he quotes from our Pastor as though the former were in harmony with him, and thus deceives "the unlearned and the unstable." He claims that the passage, "Elias verily cometh [present tense] first, [so far the passage refers to the first advent of the Elijah class—His advent in the flesh from A. D. 29, until He leaves the world sometime yet in the future] and shall [future tense] restore all things [in the Millennium, in His Second Advent]," means that the Elijah class will first come in 1874 and by 1918 will have restored to the Church the Truth that was lost to the Church formerly! Hence, he teaches two kinds and times of restitution, one for the benefit of the Church, beginning 1874, and one for the benefit of the world, beginning 1925! Merely to state his thought that there are to be times of restitution for the Church ought to be sufficient for its refutation; for restitution is typed by the jubilee and refers exclusively to what was lost in Adam. Such things are not actually restored to the Church and the application, covert or overt, of the great cycle ending in 1874, as pointing to blessings for the Church, is absurd. On 1925 being the beginning of the Jubilee for the world, we would say, this cannot be true for two reasons: (1) That date would have to be reached by a great cycle, if it introduced the antitype of Israel's



Jubilee. The types suggest the rule of squaring the lower period for reaching their next higher period. Thus, the number of days in the week ending a week after the Sabbath of the Passover, Nisan 15, must be squared to reach the Jubilee day, Pentecost, the period next higher than the Sabbath (Lev. 23: 15, 16); and the number of years of a Sabbath cycle ending in a Sabbath year must be squared to reach the Jubilee year, the period next higher than the Sabbath year. Hence, we see that the square of the lower period leads up to and introduces the next higher period; and as the seven Sabbath cycles with their Jubilee year are the highest typical period, the next higher period must be the antitype, or great cycle. Hence, to get the antitypical cycle we must square the highest typical period—50 years—and the resultant 2,500 years, constituting such a great cycle, lead up to and introduce the antitypical Jubilee—in 1874. There was no antitypical cycle leading up to and introducing 1925; therefore that year could not mark the beginning of the antitypical Jubilee.


(2) God, Himself, in the only passage that speaks of there being 70 Jubilees, expressly tells us that they would all be kept during the desolation of the land, 607-537 B. C. (2 Chro. 36: 21); consequently the 51 cycles since the last typical Jubilee held before the desolation of the land, cannot be followed by Jubilee years, since these Jubilees were kept during the desolation. Therefore, these 51 cycles are of 49 years each and not of 50 years. Therefore, the cycles following the last before the captivity lead up to and end in 1874 as our Pastor taught, and not in 1925 as J. F. Rutherford's theory claims. These two points being true, there was no correct way of reaching 1925 as the beginning of the antitypical Jubilee. Therefore, 1925 could not be the date for the beginning of the antitypical Jubilee: 1874, and 1874 alone, is the date for that event. J.F. Rutherford's perversions on this subject



only add to the already overwhelming proof that he is eating and drinking with the drunken, and that his right eye is darkening more and more.*


(40) Having shown the fallacy of his new setting of Elijah restoring all things by 1918 and the antitypical Jubilee for the world beginning 1925, we might dismiss his entire view as sufficiently refuted; but we will present a number of reasons against the thought that antitypical Elijah first put in his appearance in 1874, because the Lord desires the Sword of Truth to be thrust into the right eye of "the foolish," "unprofitable shepherd," who in his efforts to cure the effects of the sword-thrust, will darken his right eye all the more, will let go of further truths that contradict his view and invent new errors in their place, as he has done after every sword's thrust into his right eye in the past. Here is the refutation:


(1) The fulfilled facts antitypical of Elijah's acts recorded in 1 Kings 17: 1—19: 21; 21: 17-29, prove that antitypical Elijah became active while our Lord was in the flesh and, so far as these passages are concerned, continued in such activity until 1914. For details please see B 249-266 and the discussion above.


(2) The fulfilled facts antitypical of 1 Kings 19: 19-21 and 2 Kings 2: 1-25, prove that antitypical Elijah, after functioning for many centuries, called antitypical Elisha in 1846, afterwards journeyed with him to antitypical Gilgal, 1874, to antitypical Bethel, 1878, to antitypical Jericho, 1881, to antitypical Jordan, 1914, and separated from him in 1917, since which time antitypical Elisha functions without antitypical Elijah. For details please see Z '04, 252, pars. 4, 5; Z '15, 286, pars. 5-9; P '27, 18-39.



*The above two arguments were first published early in 1920, shortly after the error under review began to be taught. Of course, the facts of 1925 and since disprove the view under review; for it failed of fulfillment.



(3) The Bible chronology connected with antitypical Elijah proves that he began to function before 539, and that he continued to function up to and years after 1799. Elijah's flight (1 Kings 17: 2-5) types the same thing as is symbolized by the woman's flight into the wilderness (Rev. 12: 6), which occurred in 539; and as she remained 1,260 years in the wilderness, so did antitypical Elijah remain in isolation until 1799. Again, Elijah's closing the literal heavens 3 1/2 years against rain (1 Kings 17: 1; 18: 1; Jas. 5: 17, 18) generally speaking types the same general thing as is symbolized by the two prophets preventing the symbolic heavens from giving rain from 539 to 1799 (Rev. 11: 3, 6).


(4) Antitypical Jezebel as the persecutor of antitypical Elijah is set forth as active against the true Church during the Thyatira period, which ended over 500 years before 1874 (Rev. 2: 20).


(5) Beginning in 1309 by a reformation through individuals and in 1517 by a reformation through sects, antitypical Elijah restored the many teachings from symbolic Babylon. Hence, antitypical Elijah centuries before 1874 began to restore the lost truths.


(6) The restoration of these truths had progressed so far that the Sanctuary class—antitypical Elijah—was cleansed from the main defilements of the papacy and had in its possession the many truths by 1846.


(7) Interwoven with the Elijah type are secular events typing happenings synchronizing with, and related to some in antitypical Elijah's experiences and dating centuries, before 1874 (1 Kings 20: 1—22: 40). For details please see above.


(41) To the above seven Biblical reasons may be added the Pyramid's corroboration which gives, at the foot of the large step toward the south end of the Grand Gallery, September 24, 1846, as the exact day and year of antitypical Elijah's beginning to anoint antitypical Elisha, and, at the point of intersection of