Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing (epiphany) of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Titus 2:13
types our Pastor as the chief of the priests on earth. The same is true of Phinehas, Eleazar's first born, in Num. 25. These and other similar types and antitypes give us the thought that the eldest son types the chief one of the class of which he is a member. Germany undoubtedly was the chief member of the Central Powers; hence very properly is typed by the oldest son of Moab's king, since the latter types the Central Powers as such, i.e., the whole class. Germany was becoming so dominant in Central Powers' circles as to be well on the way of becoming the Central Powers, itself, i.e., the others were on the way of becoming subject to Germany (that should have reigned in his stead). A wall symbolizes power, also position or exercise of power. The Central Powers sacrificed Germany in the position and exercise of power by surrendering to the enemy, leaving Germany alone to continue the war. They did this to appease the wrath of their God, who really was Satan, for their own protection from further disadvantage coming from the Allies. Germany had made herself so hated by the Allies as to have made it disadvantageous to the rest of the Central Powers to be her allies. Therefore, they sacrificed Germany in their extreme crisis. The word "then" shows that chronologically this would follow the Stockholm Labor Conference. So it turned out to be; for none of the Central Powers gave up until October, 1918. Just as the Moabites cherished intense anger and hatred toward Israel (and there was great indignation against Israel), so the Central Powers hated with an unexemplified hatred the Allies for their devastating work on the former. But finally the end of the stress and distress came, and the feelings of all concerned have become much mollified, all seeking a return of good feeling (and returned to their own land).
(30) We have thus finished our study of 2 Kings 3. Like our previous typical studies, we find this chapter
very informing, very clear in its prophetic delineation of the things it was Divinely intended to shadow forth. It is thus only another demonstration of the inspiration and infallibility of God's Word—the Scripture of Truth; and as such it should be precious to us as a manifestation of our Father's foreknowledge; and its understanding should be precious to us as an expression of His special favor upon us who are thus privileged to see and appreciate the advancing light. Incidentally we might remark that the time setting of this antitype shows that our understanding of Elijah and Elisha is correct; and it contradicts the Tower's position; for according to it antitypical Elisha began to act separately from antitypical Elijah in 1919, over a year after this chapter proves the former was acting separately from the latter, while the previous chapter proves the separation occurred two years before.
(31) It is more than eleven years [written January, 1937] since we have given anything new in detail on Elisha, type and antitype. The only exceptions to this are isolated features not seen when describing the general features of which they are parts, e.g., the antitype of Elijah's anointing Elisha by throwing his mantle over him, the antitype of Elijah's question and Elisha's answer just before their parting, and the antitype of Elisha's anointing Jehu. The last time that we wrote as a new thing on a lengthy type and antitype as to Elisha was in 1925. We abstained from giving further details on the Elisha type, not because we were not in possession of such details, for we have had them, but because we had decided to reserve such details until we would write the book [the tenth volume of this work] that we promised the brethren and incorporate them into that book. E.g., except the last four episodes in which Elisha took part—the anointing of Hazael, and of Jehu, the events connected with Elisha's final sickness and death and his bones resuscitating the dead Moabitish robber whose body
came into contact with them—practically everything in the Elisha type had become clear to us by late in 1920. Now the anointing of Hazael and of Jehu are clear to us, these having been sometime ago fulfilled. We just said that we had intended to reserve those parts of the Elisha type not yet treated by us until we would write the aforesaid book. But there has accumulated so much more matter than that book should reasonably contain that we have decided to publish in this volume some of it before that book appears, e.g., that belonging to Elisha. Hence we present some of that matter in this chapter.
(32) It will be recalled that J.F.R. [which he will henceforth call J.F. Rutherford, for short] has successively set up four conflicting views of the Elijah and Elisha antitype. In the February, 1918, "Tower," after getting a report of our pertinent view, he claimed, as we did, that the separation of 1917 was that of antitypical Elijah and Elisha, and, reversing our thought, he claimed that the Societyites were antitypical Elijah and that the so-called opposition was antitypical Elisha. We drove him from this latter position, among other ways by the argument that since Elisha, not Elijah, had the mantle after the separation, and since the Societyites, and not the so-called opposition, had the antitypical mantle after the separation, the Societyites as such officially must be antitypical Elisha. Unable to meet this point and still hold our Pastor's view on the subject, a view that lay at the basis of our view, since he did not dare let it appear that he was leading a Great Company movement, he repudiated our Pastor's view and set forth another, i.e., that Elijah represented the head of the Little Flock, defined by him as the Society leaders, and Elisha represented the body of the Little Flock, defined by him as the Society followers. We refuted this view from four standpoints—that it was unscriptural, unreasonable, unhistorical and unstewardly. Six weeks after
this refutation appeared, unable to answer from the standpoint refuted by these four lines of argument, he brought forth a third new view—that Elijah represents the Little Flock up to the summer of 1918, and that Elisha represents the Little Flock from the late summer of 1919 onward, i.e., that antitypical Elijah was transubstantiated into antitypical Elisha. With many arguments we immediately refuted this third new view. Thereupon he came out with a fourth new view, i.e., that neither Elijah nor Elisha represent a class, but a work—Elijah the Church's work up to 1918 and Elisha its work from 1919 onward.
(33) Thereupon we refuted his fourth new view. He ignored this refutation and invented no other new view on Elijah and Elisha, probably fearing the effect on his followers, if, after four times being driven from as many of his positions, he should take up still another new one. But his time setting for his third view and his fourth view does not fit the facts of the antitype. His fourth view is a mere subterfuge; for persons are not Biblically used to represent works, let alone persons working together for years to represent works not intertwined, but consecutive. The facts that we gave in The Last Related Acts of Elijah and Elisha [Chapter II] and in our replies to the third and fourth views [Chapter III], both in their nature and in their time setting overthrow the third and fourth views. Again, according to the third and fourth views the acts antitypical of Elisha's acts in 2 Kings 3 should have come in or after the late summer of 1919, while in the foregoing part of this chapter the fulfillment proves that antitypical Elisha's part therein was completed by Passover, 1918, at which date, according to his theory, the Elijah work was going on and the Elisha work had not yet begun. The same inconsistencies in his third and fourth new views as to fact and time will appear in a number of antitypes that will be given in the rest of this and in the next chapter.
We now proceed to the discussion of 2 Kings 4, whose four episodes will be set forth now, type and antitype, in their order, we trust to the blessing of all.
(34) The episode of 2 Kings 4: 1-7 represents conditions in the Society during the imprisonment of the Society leaders, the climax of those conditions being connected with the petition work for the release of such leaders and for the Societyites' freedom from oppression as to certain of their constitutional rights. The widow (v. 1) represents the Society adherents from the standpoint of being bereft of their symbolic husband, the imprisoned leaders. Her husband's dying represents the arrest, trial and sentence of these leaders, and his being dead represents their imprisonment, which severed them from the Societyites. Elisha types the crown-lost and Youthful Worthy Societyites in their capacity of being God's mouthpiece to the public, especially the leaders among these, like Bros. Spill, Page, Barber, Sexton, Bohnet, Anderson, etc. The widow's two sons represent the two classes of which the Societyites consisted: The Great Company and the Youthful Worthies—the pe shenaim, two parts or classes. The creditor represents persecuting U. S. officials, i.e., prosecutors, judges, magistrates, draft boards, military officers, secret service men, policemen, etc. The creditor's seeking to reduce the two sons to servitude represents these officials' applying and threatening to apply various repressive measures to the Societyites, existing as two classes. These repressive measures were prosecutions for distributing Vol. VII and the Fall of Babylon tract, suppressing Vol. VII and the Fall of Babylon tract, drafting Societyites in spite of their conscientious objection to military service, torturing those refusing to enter military service, prohibiting in various localities their propaganda work and winking at the populace mistreating them. The widow crying to Elisha represents the Societyites as bereaved of the imprisoned Society leaders bewailing
with much sorrow their sad plight and that of those who were actually Great Company members and Youthful Worthies to the Societyites as God's mouthpiece to the public, especially to their leaders as such: Bros. Spill, Page, Sexton, Barber, Bohnet, Anderson, etc., etc. Her saying that her husband was dead represents the bereaved Societyites with grief mentioning their bereavement of their leaders. Her saying that Elisha knew that he had been God-fearing represents the bereaved Societyites' reminding especially the new leaders among God's mouthpiece to the public that the imprisoned leaders had reverenced Jehovah and were suffering for it. Her plaint that the creditor was seeking to reduce her two sons to servitude represents the bereaved Societyites' bemoaning to antitypical Elisha the persecutions and their intended effects.
(35) Of course, to one of a benevolent heart such plaints were requests for help and were so recognized by Elisha, typical and antitypical. And as Elisha asked (v. 2) the widow what possessions she had that could be used to restrain the creditor from enforcing his demand, so his antitype asked her antitype what possessions the antitypical widow had that could be used to restrain the persecuting officials from their oppressive course. In Bible symbols oil sometimes represents the Holy Spirit (Ps. 45: 7; Acts 10: 38; Ps. 133: 1, 2); sometimes the spirit of understanding of the Truth (Matt. 25: 3, 4, 8-10; Col. 1: 9; Is. 11: 2, 3; Ex. 30: 22-33); and sometimes the Truth itself (Zech. 4: 12; Jas. 5: 14). The pot of oil in this place (v. 2) represents the Truth on freedom of conscience, press, speech, propaganda and assembly. This was the only thing in the possession of the bereaved Societyites that then had any value in the eyes of the persecuting officials, for it was included in the bill of rights added as amendments to the U. S. Constitution; and it bound these officials. Elisha's suggesting (v. 3) that she ask vessels for herself from abroad types that the Societyites
as God's mouthpiece to the public, especially their leaders, advised the bereaved Societyites to ask from outsiders their signatures for a petition to the powers that be for the release of the imprisoned leaders. The charge (v. 3), Let them not be few, represents the Societyites as God's mouthpiece to the public, especially their leaders, advising that the number of petitions be very many, not a few. The work of pushing the securing of the petitions was not done by The Tower or its editors, and that for prudential reasons, since The Tower was under the suspicion and constant watch of government officials. It was, therefore, put in charge of Bro. E. D. Sexton, who used whatever papers could be persuaded to carry a propaganda article on the petition work as news. Especially through The Labor Tribune, of Pittsburgh, and the St. Paul New Era Enterprise did he appeal to all the Societyites (the widow and her two sons) to engage in the petition work. The pilgrims and elders cooperated with him in arousing the Societyites thereto. A very generous response was made by the Societyites, who everywhere and from all (v. 3) sought signatures to the petitions. And the public also showed a generous response, especially after the Armistice (November 11, 1918). We are informed that the signatures ran into the millions.
(36) It will be noted that empty vessels were requested and gotten (vs. 3, 4) and that oil was poured into them in secret, herself and two sons being the only witnesses thereof (v. 5). The sons had gotten the empty vessels without mentioning their purpose in borrowing them, as is implied in the secret use of them. The borrowed vessels contained no oil, which represents that above the signatures at the petitions' beginning the truths on the freedom of conscience, press, speech, propaganda and assembly were not expounded as the grounds on which the petitioners made request; nor was freedom for the Societyites from the pertinent present and threatened oppressions and for
freedom of continuing their work unmolested requested in the petitions. Rather, the petitions requested freedom for the imprisoned leaders. And because this particular point, requesting the freedom of the imprisoned leaders, is not a feature of the type, rather the consequence on the two sons of the debt of the dead father being the thing stressed in the type, the emptiness of the vessels is set forth in the type to indicate that the petitions would contain nothing as to requesting the Societyites' pertinent constitutional rights. In other words, the full purpose of petitioning the government, which purpose included the request that the Societyites be protected in their exercising their constitutional rights of liberty of conscience (worship), speech, press, propaganda and assembly, was not disclosed to the signers, even as the two sons on borrowing the vessels did not tell the neighbors why they desired them, a fact proved by the secrecy in pouring the oil (vs. 3-5). We now proceed with our study.
(37) What is represented by pouring the oil out of the one vessel into all the borrowed vessels? We answer: The exposition of the above-mentioned constitutional rights guaranteed to all, and therefore to the Societyites as consisting of Great Company members and Youthful Worthies, and the making of this exposition a part of the petitions. In that exposition it was set forth that these rights had in part been illegally taken from them and were threatened entirely to be taken away from them; and it was requested that these violations of their constitutional rights be made to cease. This exposition and its implied request were, therefore, attached to these petitions, accompanying them as a part of them. The mother's requesting still another vessel (v. 6), after the last of the borrowed ones was filled, types the fact that the bereaved Societyites wanted still more petitions after all that could be had were gotten. The reply of her son, that no more were obtainable, types the fact that the signature
seekers when requested to deliver more petitions replied that they could get no more. The staying of the oil (v. 6) represents the fact that the pertinent truths were connected with no more petitions. The widow coming to and telling Elisha (v. 7) that she and her sons had done what he had advised represents that the bereaved Societyites in their two classes made a report to the Societyites as God's mouthpiece to the public, especially the leaders, on the petition work. Elisha's telling (v. 7) her to sell the oil and from the proceeds to pay her debt and support herself and sons represents that the Societyites as God's mouthpiece to the public, especially the leaders, advised the Societyites as the bereaved ones to present the petition to the U. S. government and by the value of the pertinent constitutional rights satisfy the creditor, the government, as to its debt claims on the Societyites and to obtain for the future the right to use unmolested their constitutionally guaranteed rights of liberty of worship, speech, press, propaganda and assembly.
(38) While the type does not tell of the widow's following Elisha's advice, her character as displayed in her having followed it before is a guarantee that she followed it to the end. In the antitype the advice was followed and the desired results were obtained, the husband's debt was paid (the imprisoned brothers released) and the Societyites in their two classes came into enjoyment of their constitutional rights in the freedom of worship, speech, propaganda, press and assembly. This petition work was begun in the Fall of 1918 and ended early in 1919. The imprisoned leaders were delivered about March 21, 1919. But this typical story was enacted quite awhile after Elijah's and Elisha's separation; for all the events of 2 Kings 2: 12—3: 27 were typically fulfilled before 2 Kings 4: 1-7 started to be fulfilled; and in the antitype the antitypes of these things, except those mentioned in v. 25, were fulfilled before the antitype of 2 Kings 4: 1-7 set in.
This demonstrates the falsity of J.F.R.'s time setting for the commencement of the antitypical Elisha work, as he puts it; for the facts of the antitype prove that antitypical Elisha began his work in the summer of 1917, and that 2 Kings 4: 1-7, which represents a part of antitypical Elisha's work, began in the fall of 1918, long after he had been working separate and distinct from antitypical Elijah, while J.F.R.'s setting makes his alleged antitypical Elisha work begin in the late summer of 1919, at the Cedar Point Convention. Accordingly, this episode fits in nicely with the time setting of the antitype of the last related acts of Elijah and Elisha and Elisha's subsequent works as set forth foregoing. God be praised for this light!
(39) In the second episode of 2 Kings 4, that respecting the Shunammite (vs. 8-37), there is a typical history given of the Societyites in their relation to a public witness movement from the early summer of 1917 to the late summer of 1919. In this story Elisha represents the Societyites, especially in their leaders, as God's mouthpiece to the public. Gehazi represents J.F.R. as the executive and leading teacher for the Societyites as God's mouthpiece toward the public. The Shunammite represents the Societyites as the nourisher of a public witness movement. Shunem means two resting places and represents the Society as the dwelling place of the Societyites as consisting of two classes—Great Company members and Youthful Worthies. The Shunammite's husband represents the Societyites, especially the local leaders, as the life-givers of a public witness movement, while her son represents a public witness movement, even as we have already seen that the son of the widow of Zarepath (see Chapter I) represents a movement—the anti-papalabsolutism and anti-papal-idolism movement of the Dark Ages. Having seen what is the general significance of the type and the typical character of its participants, we are now ready to take up a general discussion of the details
of the Shunammite story, which even as a story is a most touching one. This is all the more so for those who saw it pictured in the Photo-drama of Creation so well and feelingfully.
(40) Elisha's journey (v. 8) to Shunem types the Societyites as God's mouthpiece to the public in their leaders coming to the Society as the sphere of activity for Great Company members and Youthful Worthies. This set in immediately after June 27, 1917, the date that the Bible (2 Kings 2: 3, 5), facts and the Pyramid show that the separation between antitypical Elijah and Elisha in the two representative leaders of these classes occurred. The Shunammite's laying hold (literal translation) of him to eat bread, the staff of life, represents the first support that the Societyites gave to their leaders. This began at Bethel as the Bethelites perceived that there was trouble between J.F.R., W. E. Van Amburgh and A. H. MacMillan, etc., who were representatives of antitypical Elisha, and the Board's majority and ourself, who were representatives of antitypical Elijah. Sides began to be taken and the majority of the Bethelites took the side of "the present management," who were the representatives of antitypical Elisha. The initial support that such partisans gave the representatives of antitypical Elisha is the antitype of the first feeding of Elisha by the Shunammite. In Bethel the trouble came up often, and always the majority favored "the present management," antitypical Elisha's representatives. The support that these majorities gave the early subsequent measures of the leaders in antitypical Elisha is the antitype of the subsequent food given Elisha by the Shunammite, while these leaders' bringing the knowledge of the trouble to what proved to be Great Company members and Youthful Worthies in Bethel is the antitype of Elisha's subsequent comings to Shunem. His eating represents the acceptance of such support by antitypical Elisha. The Shunammite's commending to her husband (v. 9)
Elisha's office and character (holy man of God) types the partisan Bethelites' commending first "the present management," then the new Board of Directors, Tower editors and co-operating pilgrims and Bethel family, etc., as being God's mouth and hand (man of God) and separate from others and dedicated to God therefore (holy). These commendations began in response to the petitions of commendation of "the present management" circulated in Bethel, before J.F.R., July 19, sent out his letter to the churches asking their vote of confidence in "the present management," the new Board and Tower editors. The giving of that vote started, with the Church in general outside of Bethel, the building of the antitypical chamber, as typed in v. 10. The statement, "which passeth by us continually" (v. 9), types the supporting Societyites indicating that the above-mentioned representatives of antitypical Elisha were constantly active in their ministries among the Societyites (but actually as Great Company members and Youthful Worthies, Shunem). These ministries can be seen in the Tower articles, the office work at Brooklyn and the pilgrim work of antitypical Elisha's leading members up to July, 1917. Yea, antitypical Elisha passed by the antitypical Shunammite's place continually up to and in that summer; for all of the energies of antitypical Elisha were used in ministries in antitypical Shunem at that time.
(41) The Shunammite's suggestion that she and her husband build a little room for Elisha on the wall (of the city) and furnish it with a bed, a table, a chair and a candlestick, was, from their standpoint, a fine example of entertainment of a prophet; for what they furnished him was really an office, a working place. The antitype shows, from the standpoint of the antitypical Shunammite and her husband, a fine example of entertaining an antitypical prophet, as the following will show. In Ezekiel's temple the chambers or rooms built about the temple represent the different spheres
of work for the priests in the Church. Hence their office functions are represented by these chambers. This will help us to see the antitype of the Shunammite's suggestion to her husband, that they build and furnish a room for Elisha on the wall. This suggestion represents the Societyites as led ones advocating the making secure of office functions for the Society leaders and the securing of them in their office. The furniture of the room represents the provisions made for the proper and convenient use of the office of antitypical Elisha. The above-mentioned advocacy began in certain ones' advising J.F.R. before July 17, 1917, when the ousting of the four Directors took place, that new directors be appointed; and, as shown above, it began among the brethren in general just after July 19, when the letter went out asking endorsement of "the present management." The pertinent building work followed everywhere on the beginning of such advocacy. Everywhere the antitypical Shunammite and her antitypical husband (local leaders of antitypical Elisha) accorded these the pertinent office functions, and they were supported therein by the led and leaders of such Societyites. Building and furnishing the antitypical chamber were completed by August 8, when the four Board Directors gave up and left Bethel, when antitypical Elisha firmly held his office powers. That powers, as connected with the office, are indicated, is seen in the fact that the chamber was built on the wall, which in Bible symbols pictures powers. Elisha's coming to the chamber and dwelling there represents the Society leaders—"the present management," directors, editors, pilgrims and Bethelites—exercising the offices for which they were the choice of the antitypical Shunammite and her figurative husband—the Societyites.
(42) As typical Elisha desired to make a suitable return to the Shunammite, so antitypical Elisha desired to reward his supporters. We are familiar with the fact, exemplified several times in this story, that in
types consisting of a number of acts preceding ones must be finished before following general ones begin; but that in their antitypes this is usually not done. Rather the following antitypical acts usually set in before the preceding ones are finished. This is true in the immediate antitype now being presented; for while in the type the chamber was finished before Elisha asked Gehazi to call the Shunammite, in the antitype it was under process of building when the calling of the antitypical Shunammite occurred, though, of course, antitypical Elisha was then using the powers symbolized by the chamber, though then they had not yet been so firmly made his as they later became. His telling Gehazi to call the Shunammite represents antitypical Elisha charging J.F.R. to give this call to the Societyites, who had so fully supported antitypical Elisha, at conventions, where they were asked what reward might be given them. Accordingly, this call was given by J.F.R. first at a series of conventions beginning with that at Boston, August 1-5, and ending with that at Cincinnati, October 4-7, where rewards were to be suggested and, secondly, J.F.R. by the Tower and through the pilgrims also gave the call (v. 12). The Shunammite responding to the call represents the Societyites listening to the offer of reward at these conventions and reading the pertinent Tower statements and hearing the pertinent pilgrim discourses. As Elisha first expressed his appreciation for the Shunammite's kindnesses (v. 13), so did antitypical Elisha express his appreciation to the supporting Societyites. His request, "What is to be done for thee?" types antitypical Elisha's seeking to find out from the supporting Societyites what they would like to have as a reward. His question, "Wouldst thou be spoken for to the king, or to the captain of the host?" seems to refer to antitypical Elisha's offer to secure from the civil officers (king) or the military officials (captain of the host) exemption from the draft for the brethren,
as conscientious objectors. These efforts, we will remember, were made from the mid-summer till early fall of 1917. The Shunammite's answer, "I dwell among mine own people," seems to imply that the antitypical Shunammite wanted to remain obscure and thus unnoticed by the civil and military officials.
(43) Elisha's question (v. 14), "What then is to be done for her?" was addressed to Gehazi, even as its antitype was addressed to J.F.R. Accordingly, antitypical Elisha inquired for his idea of what was to be done for the loyal Societyites. And, of course, the antitypical answer was the one to be expected from J.F.R., whose forte was, not work for the brethren, but work for the public. He chafed under the thought that so little work was done for the public since our Pastor went beyond the vail. "Verily she hath no child, and her husband is old," i.e., antitypically there is no general public witness movement in operation by the Societyites and the local leaders of these are, to use a later expression of his, "old men who are dreamers," not workers—drones, not worker bees! And antitypical Elisha, who represents the Societyites as God's mouthpiece to the public, here especially in their leaders, just as naturally falls in with the suggestion, as just the appropriate one. Elisha's charge to Gehazi (v. 15) to call the Shunammite represents antitypical Elisha charging J.F.R to call the supporting Societyites to attention, which being given (she stood in the door), antitypical Elisha promised her (v. 16) opportunities to serve in public work, in a public witness movement, with Vol. VII as the main means, in a public drive backed by extensive pilgrim and volunteer effort. And as the Shunammite at first was incredulous (do not lie unto thine handmaid, v. 16), so the supporting Societyites did not for awhile believe that they could have a public witness movement. Nevertheless, as in due time the Shunammite conceived and bore a son, as Elisha had promised her (v.
17), so the supporting Societyites did produce a public witness movement, which acted in the "Big Drive" of October, 1917, to about June, 1918. High-powered salesmanship of books, with Vol. VII especially, then began to come to birth and for awhile grew, but scarcely gave promise of what would be its later developments. Additionally, the pilgrims gave public talks along the lines of Vol. VII and the Fall of Babylon tract was widely circulated on a definite date, the last Sunday of 1917. A little later the paper, Kingdom News, was added, both as an encourager of the supporting Societyites and as a helper in the public work. Thus, indeed, a public witness movement—a son—was the antitypical Shunammite's (the woman … bare a son … the child grew, vs. 17, 18), a greatly desired boon.
(44) But this public witness movement after about seven months' existence came to grief, and after eight months died, even as the child in the type sickened and died. The activity of the movement among the local leaders (the father) and the other Societyites as laborers (the reapers) is typed by the child going forth to, and being with his father and the reapers (v. 18). The going to the reapers is not in the antitype a going to Little Flock reapers, whose work had already ended, but to those reapers who were winning Great Company and Youthful Worthy members. The reaped ones were mistakenly taken by the Societyites as Little Flock members. For the "Big Drive" was supposed to be a part of the reaping of Little Flock members. The child's cry, "My head, my head" (v. 19), coupled with the fact that this scene was in the harvest time, suggests that the child had probably suffered a sunstroke. Whether this was actually the case or not, the antitypical child did suffer a sunstroke. In Bible figures the intense heat of the sun is used to represent fiery trials, temptations (Matt. 13: 6, 21; Luke 8: 13). And to be greatly injured by such symbolic sun-heat
is a symbolic sunstroke. It will be recalled that the Society ran into the government in a head-on collision in the spring of 1918. And the resultant trials and tests gave the public witness movement a symbolic sunstroke, which first sickened it and afterwards killed it completely (the death of the child). The lad (v. 19) whom the father commissioned to carry the child to his mother seems to represent the brethren who took charge of the work after the Society leaders were imprisoned. After the Society leaders were imprisoned it was thought expedient by the antitypical father, who represented especially the local elders, that cases arising out of the public witness movement be cared for by local Society supporters and not by the headquarters at Brooklyn and later at Pittsburgh, which, because of the suspicion with which it was then regarded and because of the close watch to which it was subjected by government officials, would only injure the cause of the brethren before the government. Hence the public witness movement was put into the care of the local Society supporters by the brethren in charge at Brooklyn and later at Pittsburgh (brought him to his mother, v. 20). This stricken public witness movement was nursed awhile by the local supporting Societyites (sat on her knees till noon). The movement functioned convulsively for awhile and then ceased altogether to function (and died). By late summer of 1918 this public witness movement was dead; for the Societyites everywhere were then threatened and oppressed by officers and harried by mobs.
(45) The Shunammite going up and laying the dead child on Elisha's bed (v. 21) represents the supporting Societyites everywhere resting the dead movement on antitypical Elisha's teachings (bed), i.e., regarding it as a rightful recumbent on such teachings, since it sprang into being out of them. Her closing the door upon the dead child (v. 21) represents that the supporting Societyites kept the dead movement hid in the
teachings and sphere of antitypical Elisha. Asking (v. 22) her husband for a lad and ass to take her to Elisha represents the supporting Societyites asking for helpers (the young man) and a suitable message, teaching (the ass), to bring her to antitypical Elisha to obtain a resuscitation of the public witness movement. According to Z '18, 356, par. 4-357, par. 1, efforts had been going on for awhile to arouse to public work again. The beginnings of such efforts are typed by the Shunammite's seeking to have a young man and an ass take her to Elisha. The husband's objection to her going (v. 23), that it was neither a new moon, nor sabbath, types the objection of local leaders to starting public work, because the times were not propitious for work toward the consecrated outside of the Truth (not a new moon), nor for public work with a restitution message (sabbath). Her answer (It shall be well; literally, prosperity) showed that she expected good to come from it, typical of how the supporting Societyites expected good to come out of their efforts to arouse a public witness movement again. Her saddling an ass (v. 24) represents the supporting Societyites arranging the doctrine of public witnessing in a way that would bring them speedily to antitypical Elisha. Her charge to the young man to speed the journey represents the supporting Societyites requiring their pertinent helpers to give diligent and undivertible (except from themselves) attention to bringing them on their errand to antitypical Elisha. Elisha's being on Mt. Carmel (fertile) represents the fruitful work that those left in charge at headquarters were doing, while the leaders were in prison. The Shunammite coming to him there types the supporting Societyites coming to these brethren while they were engaged in such fruitful work. Elisha's seeing her coming types the fact that the brethren in charge of the work saw that their supporters were coming to them (v. 27). These sent word to that effect to J.F.R., who was then
still in prison (He said to Gehazi his servant, Behold, that Shunammite). They kept up a continual contact with him by letter and special messengers sent to him, and in this way gave him the information.
(46) Elisha's charge to Gehazi to run to the Shunammite to inquire for her, her husband's and her son's welfare types the request that the Societyites as God's mouthpiece to the public, especially the leaders, made to J.F.R. to send from prison a message of comfort and inquiry as to the spiritual well being of the friends and their participation in the work. Naturally these messages appeared, not in the Tower, but in the St. Paul New Era Enterprise, the Labor Tribune, and in the pilgrims' ministrations to the friends. The Shunammite's coming to Elisha and grasping his feet (v. 27) represents the perseverance and humility of the supporting Societyites in bringing their case to antitypical Elisha; for they were intensely desirous of having the public witness movement resuscitated, as they were also deeply grieved by its cessation. Gehazi's attempt (v. 27) to thrust her aside types an act of J.F.R. that, if completed, would perhaps for years have destroyed the resuscitation of the public work. It is the following: Without consulting, much less getting the consent of the brethren in charge of the work at Pittsburgh, he arranged with Conkey Bros., the Society's printers at Hammond, Ind., to have an immense edition of Vol. VII, which was then under the ban, printed in Tower form and sent out from there to the classes for distribution. This printing was nearly completed when Bro. Spill, who had charge at Pittsburgh, learned of it. He, after consulting with other leading brothers, immediately wired Conkey Bros. to cease such printing, as the responsible executive of the Society had not ordered it done. This act of Bro. Spill was just in time to prevent the government stepping in and stopping the work at Pittsburgh; for the government had detectives working as printers in Conkey
Bros.' shop; and these kept the government informed on that printing job. It was only waiting until the first act of shipping and distributing those ZG's (Vol. VII in Tower form) would take place. Then it would have arrested the brethren in charge at Pittsburgh and closed the Society's headquarters and the local ecclesias, on the ground that they were circulating Vol. VII, which was under the government's ban as seditious literature opposing the draft; and that they were circulating it while the ban was on it and during the war. The act of J.F.R in unauthorizedly ordering that printing from prison would have prevented a renewal of a public witness movement for years, had it been permitted to be completed. This act was the antitype of Gehazi's attempt to thrust the Shunammite aside from Elisha; and Bro. Spill's preventing its completion was the antitype of Elisha's preventing Gehazi from thrusting the Shunammite aside (let her alone v. 27). This was a well-timed act.
(47) On the surface the words of Elisha, "The Lord hath hid it from me, and hath not told me" (v. 27), seem to refer to the death of the Shunammite's son; but when we look at the antitype we are sure that antitypical Elisha knew that the public witness movement was dead, and hence that this is not here the hidden and untold thing referred to typically by Elisha. In the antitype there were two things that were hidden from Elisha: (1) the depth of sorrow (literally, her life is bitter to her) that the Societyites experienced at the cessation of the public witness movement, and (2) the above-described attempt of J.F.R, which, if consummated, would have ruined the hopes of a resuscitation of that movement for years. At first thought it would be more natural to take the first of these two possibilities as the thing typed by that which had been concealed from Elisha. If the second possibility be meant, the thought in the text would be that Elisha had not before realized that