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


campaigns, pertinent sermons and writings for leading justified ones to consecration, the antitypical Mahlite Merarites in preparing their materials, plans, etc., for editing Bibles and other religious books, magazines and tracts, and the antitypical Mushite Merarites in preparing for the printing and circulation of Bibles and other religious books, magazines and tracts. These two groups of Levites' bearing the tabernacle (v. 17) types the respective services of the antitypical Gershonites in furthering justificational and consecrational work and of the antitypical Merarites in editing, publishing and circulating the Bible and other Christian literature. The Gershonites' and Merarites' setting forth (v. 17) types their antitypes' beginning such services. The formers' progress, the latters' progress and the formers' arrival at Paran, the latters' coming to the kingdom's conditions in the Epiphany Levites.


(35) V. 18 introduces the journeying of the second camp, that of Reuben (behold a son). As already shown, the standard of this camp had an eagle embroidered on it. We have already shown that this figure types the Divine wisdom; and we have already shown how wisdom is the central thought in the stewardship doctrines of the three denominations typed by the three tribes in the camp to the south of the tabernacle. According to Num. 2: 2, in addition to each camp having one standard, which did not serve as the ensign of the tribe at the head of the pertinent camp, each of the twelve tribes had an ensign. It is these twelve ensigns that stood for the twelve tribes, as did the twelve precious stones in the high priest's breastplate; and they typed the same as these twelve stones—the twelve chief graces of the Christian character, corresponding to the twelve precious stones in the foundations of New Jerusalem's walls (Rev. 21: 19-21) and the twelve fruits of the tree of life (Rev. 22: 2). Accordingly, Reuben was the first tribe of the camp to the south of the tabernacle, and as such typed



the Greek Catholic Church, whose stewardship doctrine was: Christ was God's special representative in all His creative, revelatory and providential works in His prehuman condition, and in all His redemptive works in His human condition, and as such in His instructional, justifying, sanctifying and delivering works toward the Church and the world, and in vicegerental works in His post-human nature throughout the universe forever; for this undoubtedly was the stewardship doctrine of the Greek Catholic Church.


(36) The Little Flock member who started the Little Flock movement on Christ's pre-human, human and post-human office was the Apostle John, who presented this doctrine in opposition to Gnosticism of the type sponsored by Cerinthus. According to Polycarp, John, accidentally meeting Cerinthus in one of the public baths, ran quickly out of the building, lest it fall upon the heretic. St. John in his Gospel, Epistles and Apocalypse treats of the pre-human, human and posthuman office of Christ, his pertinent thoughts being that the Logos, God's only begotten, was His agent in creation, revelation and providence before He became human, became human to be God's agent in redemption and became Divine in His resurrection to act as God's agent in instruction, justification, sanctification and deliverance for the Church and the world and in vicegerental rulership throughout the universe. Being an Apostle, though also a member of the Smyrna star, St. John did not have a special helper companion (not being one of the antitypical 70 between the Harvests), as the other star members between the two Harvests did. But Polycarp, who died either 155 or 166 A. D., as the first one of the 70 between the two Harvests and as the star-member of the first two of these 70, the other being Polycrates of Ephesus, joined after John's death in sounding out this message, as well as that of the proper Paschal date. Other priestly brethren took up this message of Christ's office, proclaiming it. Thus



the sons of antitypical Aaron (v. 8), as typed, blew out this message on their symbolic trumpets. Thus a Little Flock movement advanced along the line of this doctrine. Next the crown-lost leaders appeared on the scene, who, while they woefully perverted the teaching of Christ's pre-human, human and post-human person by trinitarianism and God-manism, nevertheless held to the teaching of His pre-human, human and post-human office work as being that of God's special representative in creation, revelation, providence, redemption, instruction, justification, sanctification, deliverance and universe-rulership. Such crown-lost leaders began to offer as follows: Origen (225 A. D.), Dionesius of Rome (260 A. D.), Athanasius (320 A. D.), Basil (350 A. D.), Gregory of Nazianzen (370 A. D.) and Gregory of Nyssa (380 A. D.). Their work resulted in perverting the Little Flock movement that John started into a sect, the Greek Catholic Church. Their offering their bowl, charger and spoon started antitypical Reuben's journeying in his prince. They attracted great numbers to themselves as members of antitypical Reuben who joined in the journeying of this antitypical tribe by entering heartily into the so-called Christological controversies and applied the stewardship teaching of the Greek Catholic Church doctrinally, refutatively, correctively and ethically. Thus they waged an aggressive and defensive warfare for this teaching, as well as spread it constructively in doctrinal and ethical respects, and thereby they advanced various features of Divine wisdom. And in so doing they marched after their leaders—antitypical Elizur (my God is a rock), the son of Shedeur (lightspreader). This resulted in their advancing and vindicating God's Wisdom. Details will be found on this matter in Chapter V.


(37) V. 19 brings to our attention the journeying of the tribe of Simeon (student), which was the second tribe of the second camp, that of Reuben. The prince



of Simeon was Shelumiel (peace of God), the son of Zurishaddai (my rock is almighty). As set forth in Chapter V, we understand the tribe of Simeon to type the Roman Catholic Church. Like all other antitypical tribes, antitypical Simeon's journeying was preceded by the priesthood's blowing an alarm (v. 8) on its symbolic trumpets. The Little Flock member who started to blow this alarm was Irenaeus, a disciple of Polycarp. His sounding this alarm was occasioned by Gnosticism, both within and without the Church seeking to destroy the Truth and the Church by sectarianizing both out of existence. To their claim for their new doctrine to be the teaching of the Church, he opposed the thoughts that only that which was universally believed among Christians from the times of the Apostles could be the Truth, and only that could be the Church which held this faith immaculate everywhere since the days of the Apostles. This teaching, stated then, at a time so near the days of the Apostles, was undoubtedly true; it could not now be made in truth because in the long centuries intervening the true faith was largely lost by everybody; and in its place many corruptions have been accepted by all Christians up to well within the Gospel Harvest. Hence this clincher of the Truth in Irenaeus' day would be a fallacy now. From these conditions Irenaeus set forth the following truth: The one Church of God is the one custodian and administrator of the saving Truth. This was the message that, as an alarm, he blew out. Tertullian of Carthage, Africa, became his special helper companion, as the non-star-member of the two of whom Irenaeus was the star-member. To these a number of Priests rallied, all of whom blew the alarm on the trumpets; and as an accompaniment these constituted and aroused a considerable Little Flock movement, whose watchword was, There is but one Church of God, which is the custodian and administrator of the Truth. Presently crown-lost brethren, beginning about



251 A. D. with Cyprian, of Carthage, Africa, a disciple of Tertullian, perverted this movement into a sect. The chief other promoters of this sectarian movement were most of the successive popes of Rome, beginning with Cornelius (251) and culminating in Gregory the Great (590), Damasus (360), Innocent (402) and Leo the Great (440) being the chief ones between these two. But still more influential were Ambrose, Augustine and Jerome, who, with Gregory the Great, constitute the four Roman Catholic Church Fathers, in sectarianizing the Romanist Church. Chief among all these were Cyprian and Augustine, the latter more than the former, in perverting the Little Flock movement on the one Church being the custodian and administrator of the Truth. As these crown-lost leaders offered their bowl, charger and spoon, they antityped Shelumiel, the son of Zurishaddai, starting out on the journeying of v. 19. To these an ever increasing number of followers attached themselves as members of the Roman Catholic Church, who, controverting on this subject grew in knowledge, grace and service on it as they discussed the subject doctrinally, refutatively, correctionally and ethically; and in so doing they performed their part in the journeying of v. 19. This whole sectarian aggregation made the mistake of holding that the Roman Catholic Church is the one true Church. Details on this subject will be found in Chapter V. In standing for this teaching antitypical Simeon advanced and vindicated Divine wisdom in relation to this doctrine.


(38) v. 20 treats of Gad's part in the journeying, the tribe of Gad being the third tribe in the camp of Reuben, whose station was to the tabernacle's south, his prince being Eliasaph, the son of Deuel. Gad means company; Eliasaph, my God adds; and Deuel, recognition of power. Gad types the Episcopal, or Anglican Church; Eliasaph, its crown-lost leaders, Elizabeth, Parker, Grindal, Whitgift, Hooker, Taylor, Barrow, Laud, etc. The Little Flock member who began



the movement later perverted into the Episcopal Church was Thomas Cranmer, about 1533, who in a controversy with the pope blew on his trumpets the alarm, Jesus and the Church, while in the flesh, in secular matters were by God made subject to the civil powers. This Biblical principle gives the state no power over the Christ in His spiritual rights, duties and possessions, nor authority to rule the Church as a body, but it does subject its members in their persons in secular matters to the civil powers. Cranmer was soon joined in this movement by Latimer, his helper companion, the non-star-member of the two of whom Cranmer was the star-member. Other Priests joined in this trumpet-alarm blowing and a vigorous Little Flock movement set in, which was in part sectarianized by its Little Flock leaders, under a mistaken view of the power of the king to direct religious, ecclesiastical affairs; for they taught that he was, under God, the head of the Anglican Church. But the real sectarianizing of this movement was in its beginning directed by Elizabeth, Cecil and Parker, in their pertinent agitations and works. Then, later, other crown-lost leaders joined in this sectarianizing work. All of such crown-lost leaders by offering their bowl, charger and spoon, started to journey, in antitype of Eliasaph, the son of Deuel, starting to march (v. 20). Details on this subject may be found in Chapter V. These were joined in by a large following gathered into the Episcopal Church as members. As these entered sectarianly into the pertinent controversy, they antityped the tribe of Gad setting out on its journey as stated in v. 20. Gad's progress in this journey typed their growth in knowledge, grace and service, by a defensive and aggressive controversy on the stewardship doctrine of the Episcopal Church, i.e., in secular matters Jesus and the Church are as individuals subject to the powers that be. And by their using this doctrine correctionally and ethically, they continued to progress in knowledge,



grace and service along the line of their stewardship doctrine. As they so did, they advanced and vindicated the Divine wisdom in subjecting Jesus and the Church as individuals to the powers that be, for thereby the Divine wisdom manifested itself in the development of the Christ amid sufferings, which in a large measure came upon them through their sufferings caused by the state of persecution, etc. The foregoing discussion on the three tribes to the tabernacle's south (Reuben, Simeon and Gad) demonstrates how in the antitype the three involved stewardship doctrines centered in the Christ class as the manifest expression of God's wisdom working in His plan.


(39) In continuing our study of Num. 10: 11-36, it would be well to remember that the three days' march there described types the Gospel-Age progress of the Real and Nominal Church from their coming out from Judaism until the Kingdom. In that march the antitypical Priests, bearing the antitypical Ark, led the march (v. 33). The next to join, considered logically and not chronologically, were the crown-lost leaders of antitypical Judah, then antitypical Judah as the followers. These in turn were followed by the crown-lost leaders of antitypical Issachar, then by their ledlings. Next came the crown-lost leaders of antitypical Zebulun, followed in turn by its ledlings, etc., etc., as one camp after another joined in the antitypical march in its logical order and divisions. In every case of a camp's marching the antitypical Priests blew the alarm on their trumpets for the antitypical camps to start (vs. 5, 6). Viewed from the chronological standpoint, we know that each antitypical tribe started out after the pertinent Priestly movement was begun; for in its crown-lost leaders it started out as they began to offer their antitypical bowl, charger and spoon. Thereupon in each case the pertinent denomination set forth on its antitypical journey. Hence the march of Num. 10: 11-36 is a very remarkable type, whose study



should be both informing and refreshing. We are in the antitype now nearly at the end of the Gospel-Age march. Soon the last Priests will have successfully carried the antitypical Ark to the resting place (v. 33) that it will have searched out for the Priests, the Levites and the people. The end of the Epiphany will end the Priestly part of the journey; shortly thereafter will the Great Company and Youthful Worthy Levites finish their journey; and shortly thereafter the antitypical twelve tribes will do the same. It will be noted that the Gospel Age being accompanied by the miniature Gospel Age at its end, the tribal picture of the Gospel Age is transferred to the Little Gospel-Age tribes, the larger tribes passing away during Armageddon and their place in the picture being taken until the finished picture by the little tribes of the miniature Gospel Age. The merging of the large tribes into the smaller ones is not shown in this type, perhaps because the survivors of the large tribes will become the small tribes in the transition time. It is necessary to keep this thought in mind in order to harmonize with the picture the facts of the fulfillment during the time from Armageddon onward.


(40) In paragraph (38) we finished the section under study up to and including v. 20. V. 21 describes the Kohathites' part in the march. It will be noted that they marched in the middle of the host—six tribes marching ahead of them and six tribes marching behind them; or, to put it into another form, two camps marched ahead of them and two behind them. This position was not at all accidental. Rather it was specifically designed. This will appear from the following: The Kohathites' service was the carrying of the covered furniture and vessels of the sanctuary, and this gave to them the most sacred service that Levites could perform; and to give the intended helps to the priests, tribal leaders, other Levites and the people, it was fitting that they occupy the center of the host.



Again, the tabernacle was to be ready for the placing of the furniture and vessels therein by the time the Kohathites arrived at the newly erected tabernacle ("against [the time] they came"—v. 21). This required them to march separately and later than the Merarites and Gershonites, who had the work of erecting the tabernacle and court, as the account shows, (vs. 17, 21). Thus there was a reason for the marching position of the Kohathites from the standpoint of the Levites. There was also a reason for it from the standpoint of the Priests; for the Priests were the chief leaders of the whole host, which was indicated by their marching on this journey ahead of the host, and the tribal heads were the secondary leaders, each marching at the head of his tribe, and the tertiary group leaders, the Kohathites, had to be placed in a relation to the host to show their tertiary position—hence the center of the host was selected for this, where, accordingly, they marched. Then, too, their relations to the Israelites as such required that, as they bore the most sacred things of the sanctuary, from which the people got the most good, they should be placed in their very midst. Accordingly, the typical Kohathites were rightly situated in the host's march.


(41) When we look at the antitype, the position of the antitypical Kohathites is in its logical place; for their work is the most responsible of all Levitical work. It will be recalled that the antitypical Kohathites' work is to provide the learned lectures and books on religious, linguistic, interpretational, historical and systematic subjects. Thereby they furnish matter helpful for the furthering of the Christ as the antitypical Brazen and Golden Altars, as the antitypical Lampstand and Table and as part of the antitypical Ark, and of God's attributes as the rest of it, and helpful for furthering the Bible as the antitypical Laver. Moreover such linguistic, interpretational, historical and systematic helps further for the Priests the antitypical



vessels as doctrines, refutations, corrections and instructions in righteousness. In doing this work they help not only the Priests, but also the crown-lost leaders, their Levite brethren and the antitypical camp. Thus the typical Kohathites' being in the center of the camp types that the antitypical Kohathites would minister to all logically traveling before and all logically traveling after them in the antitypical march. In Chapter II we described the work of the Gospel-Age Kohathites. It was in the doing of the work there described that they did the work typed by the Kohathites' marching as described in v. 21. The Gershonites' work on the tabernacle in its erecting against the time of the Kohathites' arrival with the covered sacred furniture and vessels, types that the work of the antitypical Gershonites—justificational and consecrational—logically precedes the learned work of the antitypical Kohathites to help such justified and consecrated ones. The Merarites' work on the tabernacle in its erecting against the time of the Kohathites' arrival with the covered sacred furniture and vessels, types (1) that the publishers and editors of Gershonite writings on justification and sanctification work together with the antitypical Gershonites to bring people to justification and consecration and (2) that through previous antitypical Merarites' work of editing, printing and publishing Bibles and other religious books, magazines and tracts, helps for further advances would be made in Kohathite knowledge given orally or in print, as the case might be.


(42) E.g., the prior printed Hebrew and Greek recensions of the Bible furnished to later antitypical Gershonite Amramite Kohathites helps that enabled them to issue still more improved recensions. Thus Griesbach's Greek Testament, whose text is used by the Diaglott, helped Lachmann to get out his Greek recension. And this in turn assisted Tischendorf in making a number of improvements on Lachmann's



recension. And in turn Westcott and Hort were by Tischendorf enabled to progress further than the latter; and, finally, by the help furnished by Westcott and Hort's recension, and as a basis for his work, Mr. Panin has been able to publish his long promised Numeric Greek Testament, which in the changes not based on his use of neighborhood numerics should give us the correct readings of the New Testament in Greek. How extensively his emendations are based on neighborhood numerics, which God placed in the Bible as a warning against errors that some would regard as correct, we do not know, so will have to wait until he has published his large Introduction to his Numeric Greek Testament, where, we understand, he purposes to show the process through which each reading of Westcott and Hort's recension has been corrected or justified. By using neighborhood numerics to stand as a proof of a reading, Mr. Panin has misplaced the comma in Luke 23: 43. Thus we see that each succeeding recensionist stood on the shoulders of his predecessor. The same course appears in the work of the successive Kohathite Greek and Hebrew lexicographers, grammarians, translators, concordance-makers, introductionists, exegetes, harmoneticians, historians, biographers, archeologists, chronologians, geographers, dogmaticians, apologists and ethicians. In other words, as the Priestly Truth advanced, each succeeding part of the seven angels advanced on the basis laid down by his predecessor; and similarly, in giving to these, the crown-lost princes, their Levite brethren and the antitypical camp, Kohathite helps related to such advancing Truth, the antitypical Kohathites advanced on their predecessors. And in order to type that the antitypical Merarites would make preparations for such advance work by editing, printing and circulating previously their predecessors' work, the typical Merarites erected their parts of the tabernacle before the Kohathites arrived there.



(43) So far as the antitypical Priests have been concerned, the logical position of the antitypical Kohathites has been one in which they could help them. This is typed by the Kohathites' being in the center of the host, reaching forward and backward. By that antitypical position they offered the Priests the various helps that the above-indicated activities of the antitypical Kohathites put in their way; and thus they bore the antitypical furniture and vessels for the Priests covered. In a similar way they ministered to the crown-lost leaders, who in their individuals until 1917 were by God from another standpoint looked upon as Priests, since until 1917 there was no Great Company, though all through the Age from shortly after Pentecost there have been crown-losers. Generally speaking, the helps that the antitypical Kohathites have been giving to the antitypical Israelites as distinct from Priests and Levites have, of course, not been of the deeply scholarly kind. Rather they have been of the popular kind, simplified matters, generalities of scholarship rather than its particularities, such as general translations, less learned concordances, like Cruden's, Walker's, Hazard's and Englishman's, and simple introductory, exegetical, harmonetic, historical, apologetical, doctrinal, ethical, archeological, chronological and geographic matters, such, e.g., as is found in certain special editions of the Bible, like the Oxford, Baxter, Holman, Schofield, and Winston teachers' Bibles and other popular publications, including the easier Bible dictionaries and religious encyclopedias. The central position of the typical Kohathites was arranged for by God also to type the logical relation of the antitypical Kohathites to the central thought of all four antitypical camps and to each stewardship doctrine in each of these four antitypical camps. In other words, their Old and New Testament recensional, and their lexical, grammatical, translational, concordantial, introductory, interpretational, harmonetical, historical,



biographical, archeological, chronological, geo-graphical, apologetic, dogmatic and ethical works, ministered as to the Divine Power as exhibited in the camp of antitypical Judah, as to the Divine Wisdom as seen in the camp of antitypical Reuben, as to the Divine Justice as present in the camp of antitypical Ephraim and as to the Divine Love as manifest in the camp of antitypical Dan. Not only so, but these four attributes were by them singly emphasized as apparent in each one of the three stewardship doctrines in each of the four antitypical camps. And it was also to type this emphasis on the four attributes in themselves and upon each of them singly related to its respective three stewardship doctrines that the Kohathites were placed in the exact center of the host, as it marched.


(44) We are now in a position in which we can give added proof that the camps in their marching order do not give so much the time as the thought or logical order of the antitypical host. Not only the facts given above prove the logical more than the chronological order as applying in the order of the antitypical march, but also the positions of the Priests and the three groups of the Levites in the antitypical march prove this. As a matter of time order the marching was as to each denomination preceded first by the Priests' blowing an alarm that began a Priestly movement; this in every case was later by the crown-lost leaders perverted into a sect by their offering their symbolic bowl, charger and spoon, whereby they began to march; thereafter the pertinent antitypical tribe would begin its march. If the viewpoint of the typical march were to show this of the priests in their relation to each tribe, instead of some of the priests being represented as bearing the ark ahead of the host and others of them as blowing an alarm for the four camps, the priests, apart from those bearing the ark, would have been divided into twelve groups, one of which would in each case have marched ahead of the



pertinent prince, blowing the alarm. This is avoided in the type, partly doubtless because there were not enough priests available for it, and more especially because God wanted to picture forth other viewpoints from the standpoint of the antitype: (1) the oneness of the entire Priesthood; (2) their furthering the antitypical Ark; (3) their special relationship to the four Divine attributes by using them to sound the antitypical alarm for the starting of each of the antitypical camps; and (4) God brings out the work of the Priests in starting out each antitypical tribe by another type, viz., Jacob begetting his sons. But the fact of the priests' marching ahead of the host bearing the ark shows that both the logical and part of the chronological order are at work in the antitype considered as one picture, but it does not give the details of the time order for the four camps and the twelve tribes. As a matter of fact, in the antitype the alarm-blowing is a part of the Ark bearing. And the alarm-blowing proves that the logical more than the time order prevails in the antitype.


(45) Again, in the antitype the Levites associated with each antitypical tribe do their work in the time order of that particular tribe. Thus in each denomination the Gershonites do their justification and sanctification work while that antitypical tribe starts out on, proceeds with and ends its part of the march. Similarly, the antitypical Merarites do their editorial and printing and publishing work during the same stages of their pertinent tribal marches. The same is true as to the work of the antitypical Kohathites. But just as it was not the purpose of this type to bring out all the time order of the Priests' work in trumpeting an alarm, nor of the journeying of the Priests with their pertinent tribes; so it was not the purpose of this type to bring out all the time relations of the antitypical Levites in their journeying, nor their relations to the denominations with which they have been associated. Rather the purpose of their part in the type was to



bring out their logical relation to the antitypical camps and tribes as distinct from their chronological order and tribal association. Thus the relations of both the Priests and the Levites to their pertinent antitypical tribes are ignored in this type in order to bring out, so far as the Priests are concerned, the thought that they led the antitypical host as a whole logically and chronologically and as consisting of four camps; while, so far as the antitypical Levites are concerned, the typical purpose is to bring out simply their logical relations to the Priests, to crown-lost leaders, to one another and, so far as concerns the antitypical Gershonites and Merarites, to the antitypical first and second camps, and, so far as the antitypical Kohathites are concerned, to all four of the camps. Consequently the relation of the Levites to the marching is entirely logical and not at all chronological. Thus we see that the whole picture leans much more strongly to the logical than to the chronological order, which however is not entirely ignored, as can be seen in the priests' marching ahead of the whole, in their sounding the alarms for the four camps, in the time order of all three tribes in all four antitypical camps in journeying and in the time order of the Levites toward one another: first the Gershonites, second the Merarites and last the Kohathites.


(46) V. 22 brings to our attention the journeying of the third camp—that of Ephraim, to the west of the tabernacle. As already shown, the camp of Ephraim typed the antitypical camp that stands for the attribute of Divine Justice. How this is true of the antitypical camp as a whole and of each of the three stewardship doctrines of its tribes, we have shown above. It will now be in order to describe the antitypical journeying of antitypical Ephraim, the Lutheran Church. As with the march of every other denomination, it was preceded by the alarm blown by the antitypical Priests (v. 8). As we have seen, all the Reformation leaders proclaimed



the four fundamental truths of the Reformation: (1) justification by faith alone; (2) the Bible alone, the source and rule of faith and practice; (3) the sole headship of Christ to the Church, and (4) the sole priesthood of consecrated believers. Accordingly, Wessel, Savonarola and Luther, who began as star-members of the Philadelphia Church to blow the antitypical alarm preceding the journeying of the Lutheran Church, proclaimed all four of these messages controversially against Rome's contrary claims on each of the four involved points; but while Luther proclaimed all four of these messages, he laid much more stress on the first than on any of the others. His experiences, the needs of the times and the greater annihilative power of this doctrine than of the other three as against the Romanist system made him give the main stress to this doctrine. But unknown to him God had designed it so for very practical reasons. It certainly, as he presented it, was an alarm-blowing. Very few controversialists have wrought greater havoc on their opponents' positions than Luther. This accounts for Rome's counting him the greatest and most mischievous of heretics. The immense commotion that his preaching raised in the religious and political world shows that it was meat in due season. And he preached it in season and out of season for himself. He greatly loved this doctrine; for it rescued him from the torments of conscience, unappeasable through works' righteousness, into peace with God (Rom. 5: 1). His ablest and most detailed exposition of this doctrine is found in his larger commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, which commentary is one of the greatest classics of the Age.


(47) His announcing this doctrine in the 95 theses that he nailed to the door of the Castle Church at Wittenberg, Saxony, Germany, immediately aroused a storm. Romanist theologians, sensing the mortality of the blow to their entire theory of salvation, girded



on their armor to measure swords with Luther; and from that time onward Luther's life was largely filled with controversy. And on the four principles of the Reformation, particularly on that of justification by faith alone, he proved an invincible warrior. Throwing the methods of the schools to the winds, he fought as a champion of the people, understood, trusted and loved by them for his rugged honesty, simplicity, candor, charity and courage. Undoubtedly he was one of the greatest heroes and geniuses of the race. But he was more: He was a man of God. His controversy with Eck, Rome's ablest controversialist of those times, enlisted on his side his Divinely provided companion helper, Philip Melanchthon, as gentle as Luther was rugged, as scholarly as Luther was popular, as timid as Luther was brave. Thus they were complements of one another. The Lord's wisdom in making Luther the star-member and Melanchthon the companion in this pair is thus manifest. Soon other Priests were enlisted on their side, blowing away on the silver trumpets the alarm, especially on justification by faith. Shortly, crown-lost leaders joined them. Among these were Frederick the Wise and John the Steadfast, both electors of Saxony, thus Luther's rulers. A large number of theologians gathered to them; and shortly the offering of their bowl, charger and spoon began to pervert the Lutheran movement into a sect, a work in which Luther and Melanchthon, sad to say, joined. Such offering of these antitypical vessels started antitypical Elishama (my God hears), the son of Ammihud (my people is honorable), on his march as the leader of antitypical Ephraim, the Lutheran Church as a sect. These were soon joined by other zealous sectarians, who controversially entered the discussions on the stewardship doctrine of the Lutheran Church, justification by faith alone, especially on its cleansing and refutative aspects, but also in its doctrinal and ethical features. As thus the first of the Lutheran ledlings began



such activities, they antityped the tribe of Ephraim entering its journey; and as they continued therein and others kept joining and continuing with them therein, they antityped the continuance of the tribe of Ephraim in its journeying. And when they come to a halt preparatory to their entering into the earthly features of the Kingdom as a part of the Millennial camp, they will consist of those Ex-Lutherans who as a part of the Epiphany camp will come up to the Millennial camp. This activity of the alarm-blowing Priests and of the crown-lost leaders and members of the Lutheran Church furthered and vindicated Divine Justice, which was the intention of the work.


(48) Next in the type (v. 23) marched the tribe of Manasseh (forgotten) under the leadership of Gamaliel (recompense, or reward, of God), the son of Pedahzur (the deliverer is a rock). The tribe of Manasseh types the Congregational Church. Their stewardship doctrine is: the equality of the brethren as Priests before God and their fellows as to justice. The Congregational form of church government arose in revulsion against episcopacy, which made some lords over the flock, instead of making all brethren under Christ's lordship (Matt. 20: 24-28; 23: 8-10). Thus this stewardship doctrine emphasized justice as between the brethren. Lordship as against brotherhood was very marked in the Church of England, in which the bishops and archbishops are addressed as, My lord, in direct contradiction of Jesus' words cited above. Their lording it over the household was quite obnoxious to Robert Browne, who clearly saw the contradiction between their titles and prerogatives and the teachings of Christ announced in the above-cited passages. The episcopal form of church government was a gross corruption of the original congregational church polity. And against it Robert Browne appeared. He pointed out the Priesthood of all believers as making them equal before the bar of God and the bar of



church law. According to him, there was no distinction before the bar of the congregation's polity between the so-called clergy and laity. The former were not lords, but servants, though abler brethren, yet serving brethren to all the consecrated brethren in the ecclesia. Justice as between brethren before the bar of church polity he insisted upon. This involved him into controversy against the Church-State, England. Repeatedly it led to his imprisonment. But he continued to stand for his position; and even when he rejoined the Church of England as a minister, it was on condition of his refusing to be episcopally ordained and lorded over. Thus he sounded the alarm on congregational church government grounded on the Priesthood, hence brotherhood, and equality before the bar of justice for all consecrated brethren.


(49) The companion helper, the non-star part of the two of whom Robert Browne was the star part, seems to have been Robert Harrison, with whom he was closely associated for a number of years in the study and advocacy of the doctrine that as an alarm they blew forth on the priestly trumpets. He was also the assistant pastor of the ecclesia at Norwich, wherein Robert Browne was pastor. They both went with their congregation to Holland when persecution drove them out of England; and Harrison became the pastor of that ecclesia when Browne with a number of its members returned to England. Harrison wrote some on the subject of their common teaching, though in such activity Browne greatly excelled him. Thus these two Priests began to blow out this message on their silver trumpets. Other Priests joined them and a priestly movement resulted. In Chapter VI we described Browne's activities, but had not by that time learned who was his companion helper, hence have here given something on him as such. It was not long after Browne, Harrison and their colaborers started to advocate this doctrine in the way of a controversy, alarm,



that crown-lost leaders joined the movement, perverting it into a sect. They offered their bowl, charger and spoon; and shortly after beginning that activity, perverted the priestly movement into a sect. Their offering the antitypical vessels started them out on the journey, antitypical of the start of Gamaliel, the son of Pedahzur, who led the journeying of the tribe of Manasseh. Their offering these antitypical vessels resulted in attracting to them as sectarian leaders an ever increasing number of Congregationalists, who controversially marched with them, refuting Presbyterianism, Episcopalism and higher hierarchical forms culminating in papacy. They controverted these both refutatively and correctionally, as they also set forth their view on the pertinent stewardship teaching doctrinally and ethically. These continued to attract an ever increasing number of like-minded sectarians. Their beginning such a course antitypes the start of the tribe of Manasseh on the march. Their continuing such a course antitypes this tribe's progress on its march. And the arrival of such believers at the Millennial camp antitypes the Manassehites' ending their journey to Paran. Their doing these things furthered and vindicated Justice. For details on the Priests and crown-lost leaders of the Congregational Church, kindly refer to Chapter VI.


(50) We now come (v. 24) to the discussion of the last tribe of the third camp, viz., Benjamin (son of the right hand). Its prince was Abidan (my father is judge), the son of Gideoni (my mighty warrior). Details on antitypical Benjamin are given in Chapter VI. As there shown, the tribe of Benjamin about the tabernacle types the fanatical sects: Quakers, Irvingerites, Mormons, Holiness people, Free Methodists and the various faith-curist cults, such as the Dowieites, Christian Missionary Alliancists, etc. Their stewardship doctrine is: True religion is love to God with all the heart, soul, mind and strength, and to the neighbor