Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing (epiphany) of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Titus 2:13
But those troubles, being such experiences, could not be special evidences of God's special favor to the Society partisans as the [supposed] Little Flock, as J.F.R. repeatedly affirms. Hence the whole setting that is given to matters in pars. 24-27 is a delusion quite in harmony with his hallucinations. To claim that the clean offering of Mal. 3: 4 began after 1918, and that in the work of the Society partisans, is to discredit the pure work of the reaping and gleaning time, 1874-1916. Imagine, beloved brethren, the erroneous drives on Millions now living will never die after 1925 being the pure offering, and the true harvest work from 1874 to 1916 being in comparison unclean! No wonder the Bible for such effusions calls the Society's president evil, drunk, foolish and unprofitable! His applying Matt. 24: 10 to the 1918 troubles, as a proof that the so-called "opposition" betrayed the Society's leaders, is not only a perversion of a passage that applies to the persecutions of the faithful, usually by the crown-losers, and mainly during Papacy's reign, but is a gross and untruthful slander. The reason the government prosecuted the Society leaders was partly because they witnessed against the war spirit, which was a proper thing to do, though they were wrong in decrying patriotism in the natural man; and partly because they interfered with the draft, which was partly proven against them by intercepted letters that they wrote into camps, advising brethren not even to wash dishes, pare potatoes, clean barracks, wait on tables, etc. They, by such letters and witnessing, betrayed themselves. The so-called opposition knew nothing of what was brewing until the Society leaders were arrested on evidence that their own speeches, letters and articles gave the government. Hence we see the double error of applying Matt. 24: 10 to their 1918 troubles with the government.
Par. 34-51 claims that King Uzziah types Nominal Spiritual Israel, especially just before 1918. This
is a groundless claim. The parallel dispensation proves that he in the large picture types a phase of things in Christendom considerably before the French Revolution, while in the smaller picture he types a certain person who arrogantly busy-bodied in a certain Epiphany priestly work, and for that reason was stricken by the Lord with symbolic leprosy. A proof of the delusion under which the Society's president labors is his making Little Flock types of what are actually Great Company types on various matters since 1918 of almost everything in the Scriptures. Does he think that on the mere say-so of "that wicked servant" and "foolish, unprofitable shepherd" properly informed Truth people will accept such baseless claims? Increasingly they are driving from him thousands of New Creatures and good Youthful Worthies; and this is a factual proof of the error of such claims. In par. 42 it is said that in the autumn season of 1919 the Cedar Point Convention was held. This dating is wrong; for it was held Aug. 24-Sept. 1. This wrong date is probably, like many others of the Society's president, to lay, lawyer-like, the foundation for some time delusion that he may be wishing to palm off. In par. 45 the purging of Isaiah's lips (Is. 6) is explained as typing the Society adherents awakening to the fact that as the Lord's representatives they were to be more active. This is in utter disharmony with the pertinent Scriptural symbols, in which lips represent teaching, unclean lips represent unclean teaching, the altar represents the sacrificed humanity of the Christ, a coal therefrom represents a truthin this case the ransom, and the purging of the lips represents the cleansing of the teachings from error. Isaiah here types God's people who, while dwelling in Babylon were proclaimers of unclean teachings, but who coming into the Truth from 1874 on were cleansed from their errors, especially by the ransom truth, and
given the work of proclaiming the Word until the Time of Trouble would bring destruction.
Let us note some of his supposed clarifications, all of them in striking contradiction to the light received through "that Servant": (1) no tentative justification; (2) consecration at the Gate; (3) Christ's merit not deposited at Calvary, but after the ascension; (4) Christ's death on a tree not necessary to satisfy Justice; (5) the Church a part of the High Priest only after her glorification; (6) a Biblical mediator a reconciler (which is a priest), not a guarantor of a covenant (which is a Biblical mediator); (7) the Christ becomes Mediator only at the sealing of the Covenant; (8) the Egyptian firstborn type of clergy as such; (9) Christ's merit is the value He gained; (10) no Youthful Worthies; (11) antitypical Elijah transubstantiated into antitypical Elisha; (12) Jeremiah types the Society adherents; (13) misapplication of the Joseph type and its seven years of plenty and famine; (14) misapplication of the John the Baptist type; (15) on the slaughter weapons; (16) on the parable of the penny; (17) on smiting Jordan; (18) on the Seventy jubilee cycles; (19) on antitypical Judas; (20) on the Great Jubilee in 1925; (21) the deliverance of the Church and the Great Company by 1925; (22) the end of the trouble by 1925; (23) the return of the Ancient Worthies in 1925; (24) the establishment of the Kingdom in 1925; (25) the end of the infliction of the Adamic death in 1925; (26) confusion on the wise and foolish virgins; (27) confusion on the pounds and talents; (28) confusion on the sheep and goats; (29) confusion on the wedding garment; (30) confusion on the separation of tares from wheat; (31) confusion on the robe of righteousness; (32) confusion on Rev. 12; (33) Satan's usurpation and being given the right to rule over the human family; (34) confusion on the slayer and the avenger of blood; (35) errors on Matt. 24: 1-14;
(36) the star of Bethlehem and the three wise men as Satan's servants; (37) the point of the sword; (38) the three parts and the refining fires of Zech. 13: 8, 9; (39) the bound ones and prisoners of Is. 61: 1; (40) the gospel of the Kingdom; (41) the end of the Age; (42) the time and character of the message of Is. 52: 7; (43) confounding the slaughter weapons with the sword of Elisha; (44) all faithful new creatures die; (45) the Society is "that Servant"; (46) the evil servant is a class; (47) the incense offered in the most holy; (48) the court not typing tentative justification; (49) confusion on repentance; (50) on faith; (51) on conversion; (52) on consecration; (53) on the Sarah Covenant and Covenant of Sacrifice; (54) the thing given in consecration; (55) time and nature of the world-wide witness; (56) our Pastor still directs the Society's work; (57) on the essentials for a trial for life; (58) 50 years' Harvest; (59) Enoch experienced death; (60) the clergy as such doomed to the Second Death; (61) The Ancient Worthies can be resurrected before the Church and the Great Company leave the earth; (62) misinterpreting thousands of verses properly interpreted by "that Servant"; (63) antitypical Elijah began his ministry in 1874; (64) errors on the Channel; (65) errors as to the nature of the beast, image of the beast, etc.; (66) Elijah restored all things from 1874 to 1918; (67) Satan not cast out from heaven until 1914; (68) those not Spirit-begotten can be now on trial for life or death without the merit of Christ's blood imputed to them or applied on their behalf, and can go into the Second Death; (69) Jesus' New Creature died on Calvary's cross; (70) there are 19 instead of 12 Apostles; (71) time features are no longer to be given much attention; (72) Jesus was inactive toward Satan until 1914; (73) the heavens of 2 Pet. 3: 12 are not the ecclesiastical powers of control; (74) applies Is. 62: 10 since 1918; (75) Is. 30: 26 is not Millennial;
(76) Joel 2: 28 applies to the Gospel Age, perverting the sons, daughters, old men and young men; (77) the times of refreshing are the Harvest; (78) a new dispensational work began for the Little Flock in 1919; (79) Satan was empowered to put Adam to death, if he disobeyed; (80) the tree of knowledge yielded fruit giving knowledge; (81) there was but one tree of life; (82) Adam knew not nor ate of the trees of life; (83) the tree[s] of life made one death-proof, i.e., immortal; (84) joy began in heaven in 1914; (85) mistakes—misunderstandings, misapplications—in the Bible; (86) Sennacherib types Satan; (87) his overthrow types the overthrow of Satan's empire; (88) the overthrow of Pharaoh's army types the overthrow of Satan's empire; (89) denies that Christ developed character; (90) denies that the Church develops character; (91) opposes character development to covenant keeping; (92) applies Rom. 12: 1 to new creatures only; (93) incompletely defines holiness; and (94) faith; (95) teaches confusion on separation of the good and bad fish; (96) claims one sacrifices only his imputed rights; (97) claims all actually sacrifice the same quantity and quality; (98) claims that Jesus does all the sacrificing; (99) denies that the under-priesthood coöperates under the Head in sacrificial acts; (100) teaches that the under-priests are not part of the High Priest until their glorification; (101) teaches that only then will they share in the sin-offering; (102) wrongly defines the antitype of the altar; (103) opposes sacrificing to covenant keeping in the new creature; (104) errs as to the Amalekites' ancestor; and (105) on their typical significance; (106) teaches that Esau types Satan; (107) that saints first began in 1874 to journey to the Kingdom; (108) teaches that Saul types all anointed ones in and out of the Truth in 1918 and later; (109) that Saul later types those who cease thoroughly to smite the ecclesiastics; (110) that the Nominal Church was completely
rejected after 1918; (111) misapplies Mal. 3: 1-4 to 1918 onward; (112) misapplies Ezek. 21: 27 as pointing indirectly to Jesus' coming to the temple in 1918; (113) makes the 3½ years—29-33 A.D.—parallel to the 3½ years—1914-1918; (114) perverts fit-man experiences into Little Flock experiences; (115) claims that the offerings of Mal. 3: 4 began in 1918; (116) applies the persecutions and betrayals of Matt. 24: 10 to 1918; (117) teaches that Elijah and Elisha type two works; (118) their separation, the separation of two works; (119) Uzziah types Nominal Spiritual Israel, especially just before and immediately after 1918; (120) perversion of numerous typical Scriptures for his 1918 delusion; (121) perverts the symbolic teachings of Is. 6: 1-10 in the interests of the 1919 and subsequent drives; (122) teaches that the earth was not redeemed; (123) on at least nine points impinges against the ransom; (124) hypocrisy first began in Enos' days; (125) Enoch's not seeing death means that he observed no one die; (126) Enoch's not seeing death means he died without feeling its pains; (127) Enoch prophesied deliverance; (128) was the first so to do; (129) teaches a counterfeit dragon, beast and false prophet; (130) counterfeit frogs coming out of their mouths; (131) the nature of the advancing light; (132) paralleling 33 A D. and 1918; (133) the fiery trials on the Church; (134) the Society's work since 1919 (the 1925 Millions propaganda) greater and more honorable and purer and better done than antitypical Elijah ever did; (135) Society adherents since 1918 more favored than God's Faithful ever were before; (136) his light will be sevenfold (perfect) before the earthly phase of the Kingdom comes; (137) perverts the meaning of character; (138) perverts the meaning of image in Rom. 8: 29; (139) teaches that God, Jesus and the saints have no character; (140) wrests and tortures numerous Scriptures in the interests of his errors on character.
If we would point out the details of errors coming under point (62) above—"misinterpreting thousands of verses properly interpreted by 'that Servant'"—our list would swell into thousands of details; for almost never does he allude to or quote a passage in an article on his pet views but he corrupts its sense. Yet he says he has not changed our Pastor's teachings, has only clarified them!
J.F.R. has in the October 15 and November 1, 1928 Towers repudiated a former view that he received from our Pastor, and that he widely circulated in The Finished Mystery, namely, that the Philadelphia Church was the Reformation Church and that the Laodicean Church is the Harvest Church, claiming that the Philadelphia Church was from 1874 to 1918 and that since 1918 or 1919 we have been in the Laodicean period. We will not in this chapter examine his hallucinations on the subject; rather we will present some positive evidence proving that The Philadelphia period was the Reformation Period and that the Laodicean period was the harvest period from 18741954—the first 40 years of which—the Parousia—being for the reaping and the second 40 years of which—the Epiphany—being for the rest of the other harvest processes. As will be shown later in this chapter, and as is required by the logic of his position, J.F.R. holds that the reaping did not begin until his Laodicea began 1918-1919, though in his Oct. 15 and Nov. 1 articles, which we are herewith refuting, he claims to believe that the reaping began in 1874. He is holding back his real thought until his pilgrims have sufficiently inculcated his adherents with it to make it "safe" for him to come out in the Tower with it. For the proof of this as his course we refer to the facts given a little later. That the Bible teaches that the reaping is an exclusively Laodicean matter is evident from the following consideration: The seven angels of the seven churches are identical with the
seven angels that stand before God with the seven trumpets; and it is under the sounding of the seventh angel—the Laodicean angel—that the reaping of both the wheat and tares takes place (Rev. 11: 15; 14: 14-20). Hence Philadelphia precedes the reaping time. With this introductory paragraph we are ready to present three general lines of proof showing that Philadelphia ended and Laodicea began in 1874. The conclusive proof of this proposition will, without examining the detailed vagaries of the two articles that are mentioned above, abundantly refute them.
I. We offer first a set of comparative and contrasting proofs for our Pastor's view of the two churches as true, based on a comparison of, and contrast between Rev. 3: 713 and 14-21: (1) The names fit the characters of the two periods as he gives them (vs. 7, 14), and are contrary to J.F.R.'s perversions. The Reformation period was preeminently the period of brotherly love, e.g., as can be seen from the Protestant brethren accepting and supporting until the need was passed, the over 1,000,000 Huguenots exiled for their faith from France, the 30,000 Saltzburgers driven out of Austria and other very numerous brethren driven in masses out of various other Catholic countries, their serving and defending, frequently at great risk, much self-denial, suffering, loss of life and in other ways, their persecuted brethren, their great self denials in spreading reformation truths, translating, publishing and circulating the Bible to help their brethren to the Truth, the foreign missionary work as a witness of the kingdom in all nations and to win brethren for the Lord, the Methodist brethren giving all to the poor brethren, except what their bare needs required them to keep, the brethren in the Miller movement piling up their money on the church altars or tables for any of the brethren to take for the supply of their need, etc. Of all periods of Church history the Reformation period was pre-eminently the time of
brotherly love. But from 1874 and particularly from 1878 onward except among the Truth people the love of many— those of the nominal church—waxed cold. On the other hand from 1874 and especially from 1878 till 1914 began the Parousia features of Laodicea—the agitations for justice for the people—Laodicea means justice, vindication for the people—in the cries of relief from wrong and exposure of wrong-doers in church, state, aristocracy and capital, the rendering of recompense to the errorists for teaching error in the exposures of their errors, the taking of mouthpieceship from the nominal church, the giving over of the nominal church to loss of all her Divine privileges, possessions, uses, etc., with the consequent giving her over wholly to Satanic influences; then with 1914 began the Epiphaniac features of Laodicea—physical punishments for the wrong-doers with the World War as the first great physical punishment of Christendom for vindication of the people, to be followed by the other features of wrath, which will not end until the Epiphaniac part of Laodicea is ended. Thus the facts prove the names apply as our Pastor taught them.
Our Lord's office works as implied in the descriptions of Him from the standpoint of His pertinent works (vs. 7, 14) for these two periods fit our Pastor's setting of things and contradict that of J.F.R. V. 7 calls him holy and true, because in the Reformation time He severely reproved Rome for its unholy practices and errors and warmly advocated Protestants' holy living and true teaching. Then did He use His power (key of David) as the Church's Beloved—David—to unlock the Bible that Rome held under lock and key (symbolized by Luther finding the Bible in the monastery locked and secured by a chain) and "opened"—explained it as true (Luke 24: 32, 27)—as then He so "shut"—refuted Papacy's teachings—as none could open—vindicatingly explain—them.
On the other hand, the description (v. 14) of His
Laodicean works tallies well with His office occupations from 1874 to the present and will continue so until the Epiphany's end. He is the Amen who in His Second Advent came forth to amen—realize—the hopes of the Church and the world and thus fulfill God's eternal purpose. He has from 1874 onward most faithfully witnessed for the Truth—the faithful and true Witness—and against all error among His nominal and real people, a thing that was in the Philadelphia period done only on a small scale, i.e., for certain truths and against certain errors. One of the truths specially emphasized during this period is His being not coeternal, coequal and consubstantial with the Father, but, "the beginning of the creation of God." See e.g., Studies, Vol. V and numerous Tower articles, also Studies, Vol. I, Chap. VII. Thus we find that the office descriptions of Christ fit the two periods as our Pastor taught them and contradict the setting under review.
Again, the commendation given the Philadelphia Church (vs. 8, 10) and severe reproofs administered to the Laodicean Church (vs. 15, 17) prove our Pastor's setting and disproves the one under review. During the Reformation period the Protestant denominations were honorable women (Ps. 45: 9). Of their works of teaching truth and refuting error on doctrine and life, of their stand for righteousness, of their Bible translation and spread, of their missionary and evangelistic work and of their labors of mercy, our Lord could say, "I know thy works," "thou hast kept My Word," "thou hast not denied My name." And of their devotion and the horrible persecutions and other unexampled sufferings that they underwent—greater even than those of the Smyrna Church—our Lord could well say, "thou hast kept the words of My patience." But none of such praise could be given them since 1874 and more particularly since 1878 when they were "spewed— vomited—out." Hence Philadelphia could not have begun in 1874 and continued to
1918. On the other hand, the rebukes for their lukewarmness (v. 15), for their boastfulness (v. 17), for their ignorance of their real condition (v. 17) and for their wretchedness, misery, poverty, blindness and nakedness (v. 17) most thoroughly fit them ever since 1874 and 1878. Let us remember that the Lord sometimes addresses His real, sometimes His nominal, and sometimes both of these peoples in the Churches.
Again, the Roman hierarchy and its partisans—the professed symbolic Jews, but actually a synagogue of Satan, an assembly that Satan gathered—that began in the Smyrna period (Rev. 2: 9) were the special enemies of the Philadelphia Church (v. 9), which is true of the Reformation Protestant Churches; but is not true of them since 1874, since when they and Rome have begun to "roll together as a scroll" in more or less friendship. Hence Philadelphia was over by 1874. Again, the Philadelphia Church was kept from, not in the hour of temptation as the articles under review claim and its setting requires. The hour of temptation (v. 10) begun in 1878, in the first of the six harvest siftings, while Laodicea was not (v. 18) kept from it, but went into it. Hence the Philadelphia Church was not in existence from 1878 onward, and Laodicea was, to go into it, in existence before 1878, hence did not begin in 1918 or 1919. Furthermore, the Lord's Second Advent which set in in 1874 (not a fictitious coming to the temple in 1918, which none ever forecast before 1918 as then due to come, that idea never even being thought of until years after 1918, while the forecasting of our Lord's Second Advent did occur in Philadelphia, before 1874, as v. 11 teaches it would be) was declared during the Philadelphia period to be in the near future (v. 11), but was declared as present in the Laodicean period (v. 20). Hence Philadelphia was over and Laodicea began in 1874. No special Truth feast was promised the faithful in Philadelphia; but great feasts were promised
the Laodicean faithful (v. 20), which Jesus said would set in at His return (Luke 12: 37) in 1874. There was no knock by the prophetic word in Philadelphia indicating our Lord's presence to have set in; but there was one from 1875 on, as the Laodicean period progressed (v. 20). There was no special cry to the Philadelphia Church to repent, as the Reformation Church was faithful to her commission to the end, but the fallen condition of Laodicea since 1878 drew forth in the six siftings many cries to repent (v. 9).
The door opened to the Reformation Church was to all in it (vs. 7, 8); but the one to Laodicea was to individuals only (v. 20), which again places Philadelphia and Laodicea where our Pastor placed them, and therefore, disproves the new view, because the general call ceased early in the true Laodicea, 1878-1881. No special eye-salve was needed for Philadelphia to gain the Reformation truths, which were embraced by millions who were not consecrated, but there was for Laodicea from 1874 onward, to gain the harvest Truth, which was gotten by but a comparatively few (v. 18). Philadelphia was not wretched, miserable, poor, blind and naked like Laodicea, the condition since 1878, but had the riches of the crown (v. 11). Philadelphia was the mouthpiece of the Lord to the end of her career, while in 1878 the nominal church was spewed—vomited—out, hence in 1878 Philadelphia did not exist and Laodicea was then cast off as mouthpiece (v. 16). Philadelphia's overcomers had offered to them the hope of going to heaven and there becoming part of the glorified temple, and as part of the Bride of Christ and of the Daughter of Jehovah, had the privilege of receiving the family name, the crown (v. 12), being the special reward conditionally offered to all in it (v. 11) throughout the Reformation period for overcoming. This was certainly the hope offered to the whole Reformation Church, while to the consecrated of Laodicea, not to all in it (note
the distinction between the general and special calls here implied in this contrast), the kingdom and joint-heirship with Christ (v. 21) and the Divine nature (gold tried in the fire; v. 18) were the special promises. Hence we conclude that the comparisons and contrasts between Philadelphia and Laodicea as given in Rev. 3: 7-13 and 14-21 prove that Philadelphia was the Reformation Church ending its career in 1874, while Laodicea was the harvest Church beginning in 1874 and not ending for many years yet—in 1954, we believe, the Bible to teach.
II. The prophetic chronology proves that Laodicea began in 1874; hence not in 1918 or 1919, and hence Philadelphia was over by 1874. We will give our chronological points briefly; and believe they are conclusive on the time of those two churches.
(1) If Philadelphia lasted only from 1874 to 1918 its duration was 43½ years. But since each of the trumpets of Revelation corresponds in time with the time of its pertinent church, the messenger of each church being the messenger with the pertinent trumpet, the Philadelphia messenger must have blown for at least 391 years and 15 days (Rev. 9: 13-15); hence he started to blow hundreds of years before 1874. Therefore Philadelphia must have begun hundreds of years before 1874. When after the symbolic earthquake we write our promised exposition of the Revelation, we will submit conclusive proof that the Philadelphia Church began about twenty-five years before Luther's 95 theses were published October 31, 1517. Our proof will show that the second woe, the one under the sixth trumpet, lasted to within a few years of 1874. However, for the purpose of the matters at hand the above is conclusive, that the Philadelphia Church began hundreds of years before 1874, and that by 1874 Laodicea was due.
(2) The 390 days of bearing Israel's sin (Catholicism's sins borne 390 years by the faithful, as distinct
from the contextual Jerusalem's, Protestantism's sins borne 40 years—1874-1914—by the faithful; Ezek. 4: 4-6) represents the full period of the second woe of Rev. 10: 12, etc., except its last year and 15 days, and was therefore wholly within the period of Philadelphia and was over before the 40 years' siege of Protestantism began in 1874. Hence Philadelphia was over by 1874 and Laodicea began then.
(3) The 6,000 years from the fall, ending in 1874 and introducing the Millennium as the end or Harvest of the Gospel Age, must then have set in as that which brought in the lapping of the Millennium and the Gospel Age (Matt. 13: 40), since the Harvest is confined to Laodicea (Rev. 11: 15; 14: 14-20). Hence Laodicea must have begun in 1874 and therefore, by that time Philadelphia was over.
(4) The 1335 days of Daniel (12: 12) ended in 1874, and prove the Lord's Second Advent set in then, while Jesus declares that at that time He would come forth with the harvest message and work, which are Laodicean as shown above (Luke 12: 37; Matt. 13: 40-43; 24: 30, 31; Rev. 14: 14-20; Ps. 50: 3-5).
(5) The Parallel Dispensations show that as the reaping of the Jewish Age was in the end of the Jewish Age, i.e., the first period of the Church—Ephesus—so the reaping of the Gospel Age must be in the parallel time and stage of the Gospel Age—1874-1914 and is thus in the end (Matt. 13: 40), the last or Laodicean period of the Church.
(6) The antitypical Jubilee cycle fixing 1874 as the introduction of the Millennial Age in its beginning of the lapping of the Gospel and Millennial Ages, must have introduced Laodicea, the last stage of the Church; for in such a lapping as the end of the Age, there could not be two stages of the Church, which would make two stages of the Church for the Harvest, a thing contrary to the type of the Jewish Harvest. Hence Philadelphia was over by 1874, when Laodicea
began, the great cycle from the last Jubilee before the desolation of the land leading up to and introducing 1874 as the beginning of the Millennium.
(7) The 51 jubileeless cycles (hence cycles of 49 years), because all 70 Jubilees, being held during the desolation, none of them was repeated at the end of each 49 years of the remaining 51 cycles (2 Chro. 36: 21) ended in 1874 and their end implies the presence of the great Restorer, whose first work after His Return was the reaping as shown under (4); hence then Laodicea began and Philadelphia ended.
III. Briefly will we set forth some of the sign prophecies—signs of the times—as proofs that, the reaping being the Laodicean period, Laodicea must have begun before 1914, and hence Philadelphia could not have stretched into 1918. That Laodicea is the reaping period is, we repeat, evident from the fact that, its angel, the seventh, being the angel with the seventh trumpet, it was under his trumpet that the reaping came (Rev. 11: 15; 14: 14-20).
(1) Since the tares began to be burned in 1914, the reaping must have preceded their burning and must have been doing so for 40 years according to the parallel dispensations (Matt. 13: 40-43; Rev. 14: 14-20). Hence Laodicea began in 1874.
(2) The Time of Trouble which began with the World War in 1914 was to overtake the reaper, and thus to end his activity (Amos 9: 13); but this reaper began before he was overtaken, hence years before 1914; and new ones being won for Christ during Laodicea (Rev. 3: 18, 20, 21), Laodicea must have been during the reaping; hence it began years before 1914.
(3) The Elect were all to be consecrated—"killed"— (Rev. 6: 11) before the time of exacting wrath—the Time of Trouble—and the wrath beginning in 1914, the reaping was all over by then, and hence the reaping stage of Laodicea began years before.
(4) The Elect were all to be sealed on their foreheads
in each country in which they were before the wrath would strike that country. Hence the last of the reaping was ended in Europe by 1914 and the last one gleaned in America by 1916 when America began to drift into war with Germany. Hence Laodicea began years—40 years—before 1914 (Rev. 7: 1-3).
(5) The twelve daylight hours of the Penny Parable corresponding to the 40 years reaping time—the Parousia—and its twelve night hours corresponding to the rest of the harvest period—the 40 years of the Epiphanythe five harvest call periods were finished by June, 1911, the first beginning in 1874; hence Laodicea began in 1874, and therefore Philadelphia was then over; for the reaping comes under the seventh trumpet, which the Laodicean messenger sounds (Rev. 11: 15; 14: 14-16).
(6) The midnight of the Ten Virgins' parable, being April, 1877, when the general proclamation of Christ's second presence began, and its night beginning October, 1799, not only must it end in 1954 with the end of the Epiphany; but this also proves that when the call, "Behold the bridegroom," began in April, 1877, the reaping was already under way; hence Laodicea was then present, and Philadelphia had already ended; for the reaping comes under the seventh trumpet, which the Laodicean messenger sounds (Rev. 11: 15; 14: 14-20).
(7) In 1 Cor. 10: 5-14 the five siftings, as represented by five of Israel's evil experiences in the wilderness, are shown to have taken place in the Jewish and Christian reaping periods, which by the following considerations are proven to be the first and last stages of the Church— Ephesus and Laodicea; Heb. 3: 7–4: 11 additionally shows that these evil wilderness experiences of Israel type Gospel-Age experiences. Facts show that these five siftings were during the Gospel Age enacted on a larger scale than the siftings of the two Harvests, one of them occurring in each of the five
Church epochs between the Ephesian and Laodicean Churches. (1) During the Smyrna Church through the sifting work incidental to the introduction of the doctrines of trinity, immortality and eternal torment, the larger noransomism sifting was enacted, since these doctrines denied the ransom. This corresponds to the first harvest sifting, 1878-1881. (2) Through the giving up of the real object of the Gospel Age—the selecting of the Church for the Millennial conversion of the world—for a false one—the Church's conversion of the world and reigning over it 1,000 years before Christ's return, an unbelieving plan was set forth as God's plan—the larger infidelism sifting was consequently set into activity during the Pergamos period, since such a teaching is unbelief in God's plan for the Church and the world. This corresponds to the second harvest sifting, 1881-1884. (3) In the Thyatira Church the chief stumbling block—sifting feature—was antitypical Jezebel's unholy fornication with the kings of Christendom (Rev. 2: 20-23). This was the larger combinationism sifting, antitypical of the illicit union of Israel with the Moabitish and Midianitish women at Baal-Peor. This corresponds with the third harvest sifting, 1891-1894. (4) Reformism of the Catholic Church in head and members was the chief sifting evil of the Sardis period as evidenced by the strenuous and evil efforts of individuals, rulers, universities and three general councils to reform Christendom at that time—centuries 14 and 15 (P '24, 24). Hence it is the fourth Gospel-Age sifting, and corresponds to the fourth harvest sifting, 1901-1904. (5) The gross contradiction of the Protestant Reformers by Catholic and other enemies with the consequent sifting running throughout the next period until after the Miller movement, as the Gospel-Age antitype of the Korah, Dathan, Abiram and 250 Levites contradicting Moses and Aaron, and as the correspondence of the fifth harvest sifting 1908-1911, proves that during that antitype the
only other than the first and last church stages—the Philadelphia Church—must have been present; hence Philadelphia must have ended before the first of the Gospel harvest siftings began in 1878. Hence Laodicea had begun to operate before 1878. All of us recall how the giving of the vow (Num. 16: 37-41) with its four pledges, antitypical of the fringes—tassels—in the corners of the Israelites' garments, occasioned the contradictionism sifting in 1908. The Gospel-Age correspondence thereto is the Lord's giving through John Wessel, the principal man in the Philadelphia star (Mic. 5: 5), the four cardinal principles of the Reformation by which the Protestants were enabled to stand and the Papists aroused to contradictionism: (1) The Bible is the sole source and rule of faith and practice; (2) Jesus is the sole Head of the Church; (3) Justification is by faith alone; and (4) only the consecrated are priests. When Luther, years after Wessel's death and early in his reformation work, first read Wessel's writings, he remarked, "had I read Wessel before I began the reformation work, my enemies would certainly say that I got my doctrines from Wessel, so well do we agree." The above seven proofs from the sign prophecies, to which many more could be added, if necessary, prove that Philadelphia preceded 1874 and that Laodicea began in 1874. J.F.R.'s articles on these periods in the Oct. 15 and Nov. 1 Towers are so unutterably weak that we decided to answer them only indirectly, i.e., by proving Philadelphia to have ended and Laodicea to have begun in 1874, without wasting time, space and printer's ink in going over their puerilities.
When we first heard of J.F.R.'s changes on the Philadelphia and Laodicean periods, we made the remark that he will shortly be teaching that the reaping did not begin in 1874 but in 1918 or 1919. But there stands in the way of such a thought not only the Bible chronology and prophecy with their fulfillments, but
also the corroboration of these—the Pyramid. He recognizes this; and therefore he must needs deny the Pyramid as of Divine origin, claiming that Satan is its builder. He has not given one pertinent proof for his assumption that the Lord came to His temple in 1918. He came to it at His Second Advent, in 1874; and in 1875, parallel to the first cleansing of the typical temple (John 2: 13-17), He began the cleansing of the antitypical temple by driving away certain of the disgruntled, disappointed Adventists from among the Faithful; and, as the parallel of the second cleansing of the typical temple, He began in 1878 the more thorough cleansing of the antitypical temple (Mal. 3: 1-3) by the first of the six harvest siftings, the sixth being the one now especially active. Hence the Lord did not come to His temple in 1918, for which the propounder of such a thought has offered no real proofs, though he has presented some of his eisegetical imaginations as [alleged] proofs of it. So now, according to him, we have most of the Philadelphia time as the period of that Servant's activity, and the Pyramid as a Satan-built "pile of stones." To mark the grave of that Servant and the graves of other members of the Bethel family J.F.R. caused a Pyramid to be erected, on which are inscribed the names of Bro. Russell and others, with a vacant space opposite that of that Servant's name for his own name when he will have been buried. Furthermore, on our Pastor's headstone he caused the inscription to be put: "The Laodicean Messenger." Thus he has furnished monumental evidence of his apostacy. Query: Will he now have the said Pyramid and headstone removed?
There is a kind of logic to error as there is a true logic to truth. It is because error holds together with something like consistency, and requires the denial of opposing truths, that we made the above-given remark, viz., that J.F.R. will be denying that the harvest work was done during and under Bro. Russell's ministry,
when, last May , we heard that he taught that the Philadelphia period was from 1874 to 1918 and that since then the Laodicean period obtains. This we also thought was the logic of the later Pyramid repudiation, when we heard of it, and later we also got corroborative evidence that "that evil servant" is "working up" by "methods of deceit" the Society's adherents to a preparedness to receive the announcement that the Harvest did not begin in 1874, but in 1918 or 1919. One of the "methods of deceit" that he uses "privily" to "bring in damnable heresies" (2 Pet. 2: 1) before he publicly states them in the Tower, is to spread them among his adherents through his pilgrims. This he is doing as to the time of the Harvest not beginning until after 1918. Bro. Wise, the Society's Vice-President, on a pilgrim visit with "a mission," at Indianapolis, Nov. 29, 1928, preached there this new error.
According to Bro. Wise's statement, we can see that the alleged harvest work, as beginning about 1918, is now being privately introduced among Societyites. But the admission that their work on the Millions proposition—a work that engrossed all their public efforts from 1919 to 1925—was a delusion, implies that it must have been of Satanic origin, and hence they admittedly have spent almost the entire first six years of their Harvest in Satan's service, which would mean only this: that they gathered a Harvest for Satan. We submit the proposition that the leaders who directed them into such a service must have a Satanic, not a Divine channel in such work, hence that work—their work toward the public—was not reaping work, nor was any other reaping then done, which disproves their new harvest theory. Is it reasonable to suppose that such leaders would be used as the Lord's channel for the Lord's work subsequent to such a "big" Satanic "drive"? The Bible teaches that the crown-lost Societyites are in Azazel's (Satan's) hands for the