Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing (epiphany) of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Titus 2:13
SOME SHORTER TYPES OF THE
JASHOBEAM. ELEAZAR'S CHARGE AND BEATEN PLATES. PHINEHAS. PHURAH.
DAVID [beloved] is typically used in a variety of significances. Primarily, in the Psalms, he represents our Lord Jesus as Jehovah's Beloved (Matt. 3: 16; Eph. 1: 6), warring holy warfare on behalf of Jehovah, the Truth and Jehovah's people, and administering the matters of God's embryo or militant kingdom. Secondarily, in the Psalms, he is used to type the entire Christ class as Jehovah's Beloved warring holy warfare for Jehovah, the Truth and Jehovah's people and administering the affairs of God's embryo or militant kingdom (Is. 55: 3). And, thirdly, in the Psalms, he is used to type the Church alone (Rom. 1: 7; Col. 3: 12; 2 Thes. 2: 13). The things said in the pertinent Psalms prove this. He is used in the histories to type that Servant as executive and warrior. We understand our Pastor in his warrior pilgrim activities to be the antitype of Jashobeam, David's mightiest warrior (2 Sam. 23: 8, 13-17; 1 Chro. 11: 11, 15-19).
(2) It is reasonable to assume, since David was a typical character, that all who dealt with him were also typical characters. Hence we understand that Jashobeam, who furthered him more than any other individual warrior, was a typical character. His doing his mighty works in the harvest time and while David was in Adullam (Adullam, vengeance or justice of the people is the Hebrew equivalent of Laodicea, 2 Sam. 23: 13) implies that his antitype would be the greatest warrior of the reaping and Laodicean period; and this, of course, immediately identifies him typically with our beloved Pastor, who undoubtedly was the greatest
individual warrior for Truth and against error in the harvest and Laodicean period. Moreover, the descriptive terms applied to Jashobeam serve further to identify him as a type of our Pastor. In 2 Sam. 23: 8 he is called the Tachmonite and in 1 Chro. 11: 11 he is called the Hachmonite, literally, the son of the Hachmonite. These terms, derived from the same Hebrew root, mean the wise one in allusion to the quality of wisdom expressly applied by our Lord prophetically to that Servant (Matt. 24: 45-47; Luke 12: 4245). In 2 Sam. 23: 8 he is spoken of as sitting in the seat, which is an allusion to that Servant's office power of rulership over the Lord's household as Jesus' special representative. The term occurring in both passages, "chief among the captains," shows Jashobeam as the highest of the warriors of David, typical of how in the end of this Age that Servant would be the ranking one of all the Church's warriors. He is wrongly called an Eznite in the A.V., for the proper reading is, his spear, i.e., the spear of Jashobeam. Again, by another mistranslation, Jashobeam [the people will return, i.e., from the curse to restitution] is in 2 Sam.23: 8 called Adino. This term means he swung it, i.e., his spear, and should have been so translated. These two corrections in translation would make this verse contain, and that rightly, no interpolated sentence. This rendering harmonizes this verse with its semi parallel passage, 1 Chro. 11: 11. We might therefore render 2 Sam. 23: 8 as follows: These are the fames [famous ones] of the warriors which belonged to David—the wise one who sat in the seat [as] chief of the three [chiefs]. He swung it, his spear, against eight hundred [whom] he slew at one time.
(3) It will be noted that in the Samuel passage eight hundred and in the Chronicles passage three hundred are spoken of as being slain by Jashobeam. Both statements are to be taken as facts, as the antitype indicates. We understand spears to type refutative teachings
put forth in writings when the military figure is used. In the priest figure the same teachings are symbolized by bowls, as has been shown in Chap. II. If we consult the facts of the case at hand we will readily conclude that our Pastor's chief individual literary battle was against eternal torment and that his next greatest individual literary battle was against the doctrine of the consciousness of the dead. The havoc that he wrought through his writings on eternal torment sectarians is typed by Jashobeam's slaying the eight hundred Philistines with his spear at one time, while the havoc that he wrought through his writings on sectarians who taught the consciousness of the dead is typed by Jashobeam slaying the three hundred Philistines with his spear at one time. It will be noted that Abishai also slew three hundred (2 Sam. 23: 18, 19; 1 Chro. 11: 20, 21) with a spear. He represents, we believe, our beloved and sainted Brother John Edgar, and his spear types the latter's booklet on "Where Are the Dead," which thoroughly refutes the teachers of the consciousness of the dead. It was from this work of Bro. Edgar that we were in part enabled to see that Jashobeam's lifting up his spear against the three hundred types our Pastor's literary activity against the consciousness of the dead as distinct from his literary fight against eternal torment, a thing that by association we were thus enabled to see was represented by Jashobeam's slaying by his spear the eight hundred Philistines.
(4) When we look at the titles of our Pastor's controversial writings on eternal torment and the consciousness of the dead and peruse their contents we will readily see that on these two subjects he wrought more havoc on the sectarians [antitypical Philistines] than on any other subjects defended by them. His chief writings on these subjects are the following: The two booklets on Hell and Spiritism, a large section in Studies, Vol. V, Chap. XII, treating on the soul and
Hell, the tract on the "Wages of Sin Is Death—Not Eternal Torment," the B. S. M.'s on "Thieves in Paradise," "The Rich Man in Hell," "In the Belly of Hell," "Immortal Worms and Unquenchable Fires," "The Lake of Fire," "What Is the Soul?" "Do you Believe in the Resurrection of the Dead?" "Preaching to the Spirits in Prison," "The Great Parable of the Sheep and Goats," "To Hell and Back," "Life, Death and Hereafter," "The Great Hereafter," "Heaven, Hell and Purgatory," "Where Are the Dead?" etc., etc. Additionally, his public addresses on all suitable occasions smote hip and thigh with the sword of the Spirit these two great errors of the antitypical Philistines, though this phase of his work is not shown in the two pictures now under study; for the spear types controversial writings, not lectures. Surely his labors on these subjects have been great and effective, and certainly they make our fight against antitypical Zebah and Zalmunna much easier in the way of attaining the capture of the king errors of antitypical Midianites.
(5) Ever since 1910 we have understood Jashobeam in his two exploits outlined in 2 Sam. 23: 8 and 1 Chro. 11: 11 as typing our Pastor heroically and successfully warring against the great errors of eternal torment and the consciousness of the dead. The typical achievements under consideration are among the greatest deeds of military valor set forth in sacred or profane history. Only certain of Samson's exploits exceed them; but in Samson's case we are expressly taught that miraculous powers from God gave him his powers, while such is not the record as to Jashobeam, though he likely was supernaturally strengthened in these exploits. The constant battling of our Pastor against the fortresses of eternal torment and the consciousness of the dead made great rents in their walls and paved the way to the easy victory we are gaining over antitypical Zebah and Zalmunna, in which his pertinent writings form our chief literary arsenal for
this fight. It is our knowledge of his prominence in these conflicts that has prompted us for the past few years to suggest that in a fitting manner we may celebrate the period from his last leaving Bethel to his burial—Oct. 16 to Nov. 7, by making a special effort in antitypical Gideon's Second Battle. It is not at all our thought that only in that time should we wage this battle, though some seem by their acts to think so. Rather, we think that during that period we should make a special effort therein, and generally throughout the year seek and use opportunities to engage therein. Certainly, the exploits of our beloved Jashobeam in these two respects are a clarion call to us to engage generally throughout the year in antitypical Gideon's Second Battle, and particularly during the time of our special annual effort—Oct. 16 to Nov. 7. Certainly, under God and Christ such an annual special effort is a fitting tribute to the memory of our incomparable Jashobeam, and as such let us engage therein heartily and faithfully.
(6) Above we showed that Jashobeam, David's Mightiest Warrior, in killing first 800 and then 300 with a spear, typed our Pastor's literary work against the defenders of the eternal torment doctrine and the consciousness of the dead doctrine, respectively. The third great deed of Jashobeam we now proceed to discuss in its typical and antitypical significance. We will give in parallel columns the two accounts of Jashobeam's third deed as recorded in 2 Sam. and in 1 Chro:
2 Sam. 23: 13-17
(13) And three of the thirty chief went down, and came to David in the harvest time unto the cave of Adullam; and the troop of the Philistines were encamped in the valley of Rephaim.
(14) And David was then in the hold,
1 Chro. 11: 15-19
(15) And three of the thirty chief went down to the rock to David
into the cave of Adullam; and the host of the Philistines were encamped in the valley of the Rephaim.
(16) And David was then in the hold,
and the garrison of the Philistines was then in Bethlehem.
(15) And David longed, and said, Oh that one would give me water to drink of the well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate!
(16) And the three mighty men break through the host of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem, that was by the gate, and took it, and brought it to David; but he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the Lord.
(17) And he said, Be it far from me, O Lord, that I should do this: shall I drink the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives?
Therefore he would not drink of it. These things did the three mighty men.
and the garrison of the Philistines was then in Bethlehem.
(17) And David longed, and said, Oh that one would give me water to drink of the well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate!
(18) And the three break through the host of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem, that was by the gate, and took it, and brought it to David; but he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the Lord, and said, (19) My God forbid it me, that I should do this: shall I drink the blood of these men that have put their lives in jeopardy? for with the jeopardy of their lives they brought it. Therefore he would not drink it. These things did the three mighty men.
(7) The three chiefs of David's thirty mighty men were Jashobeam, Eleazar and Shammah (2 Sam. 23: 8, 9, 11; 1 Chron. 11: 11, 12). Our interest in this study centers in Jashobeam; and therefore we will pass by the other two in silence. The rock (1 Chron. 11: 15) types the Christ, Head and Body (1 Cor. 10: 4; the Christ in the Greek), also typed by the rock that Moses and Aaron smote twice (Num. 20: 2-13). David [Beloved] here types Bro. Russell as that Servant, not as a pilgrim, as which he is here typed by Jashobeam in the reaping time, "harvest" (2 Sam. 23: 13). This is further confirmed by the fact that David was in the cave of Adullam (the Hebrew equivalent of Laodicea, i.e., justice or vengeance of the people), which types the Laodicean condition of that Servant as one in
which he was hidden from the understanding of the world (Is. 26: 20). David's being then in the hold (2 Sam. 23: 14; 1 Chron. 11: 16)—apparently a fortified place in the cave of Adullam—types him as dwelling in God as his refuge and fortress (Ps. 91: 1, 2). The Philistines [villagers— sectarians] here, so far as Jashobeam's relation to them is concerned, type the no-ransomistic sifters in 1878 and 1879 who were moving heaven and earth to get rid of the Truth on the corresponding price and the satisfaction of justice by a sacrifice. The word Rephaim means giants and types the fallen angels; while the valley of Rephaim seems to type the sphere of the fallen angels' activities. Therein certainly the no-ransomistic sifters were encamped in an unholy alliance with the demons and in wicked cooperation with them in warfare against the Ransom and Sin-offering. In such a warfare Bro. Russell, as antitypical David, found safety in Jehovah his refuge, fortress and dwelling place (Ps. 91: 2, 9, 10). Bethlehem [house of bread] represents Bible teachings as food for heart and mind. The Philistine garrison at Bethlehem represents Mr. Barbour and his confederate no-ransomistic teachers invading, holding and misusing their office on Bible teaching in an effort to corrupt the Truth on the ransom and the satisfaction of justice by the Sin-offering. Jashobeam's coming to David under the circumstances described in the passages under consideration represents our Pastor as a pilgrim coming in 1878 and 1879 to our Pastor as that Servant, as a helper under the antitypical conditions just described.
(8) The well at the gate of Bethlehem represents the Bible—the depository of the Truth—from which the Truth teachers—antitypical Bethlehemites—are privileged to dip and bring to others to drink. David's longing for a drink of water from that well, as related to Jashobeam, represents the longing of that Servant for the Truth on the details of the ransom and of the satisfaction of justice connected with the controversy on the
ransom, which was begun by Mr. Barbour in the Spring of 1878. Mr. Barbour's deeply laid sophistries made this longing all the greater, especially his perversion of Lev. 16, to rid it of the idea of the satisfaction of justice by the Sin-offering. As David's longing for the water prompted Jashobeam to break through the camp of the Philistines and get the water from the well for David; so the longing of that Servant for the pertinent Scriptural Truth prompted our Pastor in a struggle of about a year and a half to break through all the arguments of the no-ransomers and the opposition of demons in order to get what proved to be the truth on the two sin-offerings of Lev. 16 as typing the two antitypical Sin-offerings—the humanity of Jesus and that of the Church used in the antitypical atonement, the Church's share therein having been lost sight of since shortly after the Jewish Harvest. David's refusal to drink the water gotten under such dangerous conditions types the natural reluctance of that Servant at first to accept the doctrine of the Church's sharing in the Sin-offering, which to him seemed dangerous to its bringer, as a pilgrim, for it was as a pilgrim that he came into the pertinent controversy. David's pouring out the water as a drink-offering proves that later such hesitating reluctance on Bro. Russell's part was overcome, and types the fact that he thereafter preached it as a truth of the Lord—poured it out as an antitypical drink-offering to the Lord.
(9) It will surely interest our readers to learn the historical facts, lasting a period of nearly a year and a half, connected with the antitype of Jashobeam's third exploit, especially the last phase of that antitype. While on a visit at the Bible House in Allegheny in the Fall of 1903 during the Russell-Eaton Debates, we asked our Pastor how he had come to his understanding of the Lord's Word; and in response to our question he gave us an account, lasting six hours and spread over two evenings, of his growth in the Truth from his
seventeenth to his thirtieth year; and in this lengthy narrative, among other things, he gave us an account of the facts antitypical of Jashobeam's third exploit, without either of us at that time understanding that those events were the antitype of that exploit. We will give a condensed statement of these facts: When the expectations of the brethren to experience their taking away from the earth in fleshy bodies on Nisan 16, 1878, were not fulfilled, Mr. Barbour, who had first for 1873, then for 1874, and then later for 1878, dogmatically prophesied the Church's so-called "rapture," concluded that if he did not by a figurative explosion divert the Church's attention from his failures at predicting, he would lose his influence as a Biblical interpreter; and he furnished in the Spring of 1878 the diverting explosion by a renunciation of the ransom—the corresponding price—in his periodical, The Herald of the Morning, of which Bros. Russell and Paton were assistant editors. The two assistant editors repeatedly published in this periodical answers defending the ransom; and The Herald of the Morning became for about a year a house divided against itself. Our Pastor in the Spring of 1879, seeing that Mr. Barbour was going further into darkness, and was proving irreclaimable, decided to sever his relations with him and his periodical, and to publish The Tower, whose first number appeared in July, 1879. Very shortly thereafter he lectured (pilgrim work) in New England from charts on certain features of Lev. 16 to prove the corresponding price, without however understanding its details, particularly the distinction between the antitypes of the bullock, Lord's goat and Azazel's goat. Mr. Barbour, hearing of his lectures on Lev. 16, and alluding to his haberdashery business, sarcastically remarked: "What! That shirt seller explaining the tabernacle! He does not understand the tabernacle. I will show you what the tabernacle, and particularly what Lev. 16 mean, and how they are free from the ransom thought." In
the early Fall of 1879 appeared Mr. Barbour's exposition of Lev. 16 denying the corresponding price as being taught in this chapter and giving such a subtile and plausible exposition of the chapter in an anti-ransom sense as to deceive, if possible, the very elect.
(10) Since the Tower and the Herald were going to the same list of addresses, Bro. Russell became greatly perturbed at the subtility and plausibility of Mr. Barbour's views on Lev. 16; for over a year had he been longing for clearness on the details, including Lev. 16, connected with the ransom controversy [David's longing for the water]; and the subtility and plausibility of the article in question made him greatly fear for the safety of the sheep, as well as long to satisfy their craving for the pertinent Truth details. He told us that never in his life had he experienced such worry (struggles with the demons—Rephaim), which was so great as to drive sleep from his eyes. He saw at once that Mr. Barbour's explanation of Lev. 16 must be wrong; for it was pivoted on the denial of the Bible's central Truth; but he did not have a satisfactory explanation of the antitypes of the bullock, Lord's goat and Azazel's goat to set forth in opposition to the erroneous explanations of them advanced by Mr. Barbour; and he knew that it would not do simply to deny Mr. Barbour's explanations without offering satisfactory ones in their place. Hence he feared that the article in question would work havoc among the sheep. This sent him to the Lord in a prayer that pled for the proper understanding of Lev. 16, giving as the reason for the petition that since the error on the subject had now in the Harvest appeared, evidently the time was due for the Truth thereon to become clear, and that promised to minister the Truth on the subject to the brethren faithfully, if the Lord would deign to make it clear to him.
(11) He sent word to the foreman of his Pittsburgh store that he would not come that day, and for him to
conduct the business as usual in his absence. Thereafter he offered the above-mentioned prayer. Then, knowing that Hebrews discusses more than any other Biblical book the tabernacle types, he spent the whole day in its study and in prayer; but late that night his mind was as blank on the subject as it was early that morning. The whole of the next day until late at night he spent in the same way, but without gaining any clearness on the subject. The third day he renewed his study of Hebrews, when about noon he came to Heb. 13: 10-16, and noticed that these verses treated of two sets of tables, altars, high priests and sacrifices, one set belonging to the Jewish and the other to the Gospel Age. He further noticed that v. 11 was a clear allusion to Lev. 16 as to the two sin-offerings of the atonement day, as to the high priest's activities with their blood, and as to their bodies being burned outside the camp. He further noticed that in v. 12 the Apostle refers, as a conclusion from the type, to Jesus' suffering without the gate as the antitype of the bullock's being burned without the camp; and that in v. 13 the Apostle refers, as a conclusion from the type, to the Church going forth to the Lord without the camp bearing His reproach, i.e., the same kind of sufferings as His—Sinoffering sufferings. Immediately he saw that St. Paul was explaining that the bullock typed Jesus as a Sin-offering, and that the Lord's goat typed the Church as a Sin-offering. Filled with joy at the thought that his prayers and studies had been blessed with an answer by the Lord, he jumped up, exclaiming to his wife: "I have it! I have it!" Conservatively she answered, "Do not be too sure!" Going over the verses again he reaffirmed his conviction and proved it to her and to his complete satisfaction.
(12) His worries left him at once; and the sweetest peace imaginable filled his heart; for now he had the Apostle's own inspired explanation of the main features of Lev. 16, which parallel passages clarified still
more to his mind. What should he do with his newfound treasure? The feverish hurry that he before felt left him; and instead of publishing his findings immediately, or letting the brethren in general know of them, he called a conference of leading brethren and during an eight day discussion imparted to them what in summary he later wrote out as Tabernacle Shadows. He told the conference his experience of anxiety, his struggles with demons, his prayers and his studies, as he strove to break through what proved to be the camp of the antitypical Philistines fighting against the ransom under demonic instigation. The leading brethren were, except Mr. Paton, convinced of the Truth of this matter; and they began to preach it to others, while Mr. Paton, seemingly envious that the Lord had favored Bro. Russell instead of himself with this large amount of advancing Truth, became disgruntled, and that increasingly, until about two years later—in the Fall of 1881—he renounced in the infidelism sifting the ransom, advocating a perversion of the ransom and the error of Universalism very much like what Concordant Versionism now teaches.
(13) After the conference with the leading brethren Bro. Russell preached on the subject before the Allegheny ecclesia, where first also reluctance to accept it was shown, later a hearty acceptance with a spreading of this truth set in. In the February, 1880, Tower (See Tower Reprints, pp. 72, 73) appeared the first article with the clarified light on the tabernacle under the title The Law Shadows. Almost always during the Harvest was there at first a reluctance on the part of the faithful to accept the thought that the Church shared in the privilege of being a part of the Sin-offering; but this reluctance always gave way in them to a hearty acceptance of this high calling privilege and the subsequent presenting of it to others.
(14) Our Pastor told us that the Lord doubtless kept him waiting for three days before his prayers and
studies bore fruit the better to prepare him to receive and administer the stewardship of such great and wide embracing truths as are contained in Tabernacle Shadows. Without his then knowing of it, he was as that Servant at that time given the charge of the storehouse; and the Truth on the tabernacle, particularly on Lev. 16, was the first part of the meat in due season that he as such brought forth therefrom. And loyally did he keep the promise that he made in his prayer—to minister the Truth on Lev. 16 faithfully to the brethren, if the Lord would deign to make it plain to him! Surely it was a goodly portion of symbolic water that he dipped out of the well at antitypical Bethlehem's gate! And certainly his year and a half's battle in connection therewith, culminating in his getting the Truth on Lev. 16, was the greatest conflict of all engaged in by antitypical David's Mightiest Warrior! And how inexpressibly richly blessed was its booty to the whole Church! Well may we in gratitude and appreciation cry out, God bless His memory!
(15) We take pleasure in furnishing the brethren with an exposition of a Scriptural description on another phase of our Pastor's work, wherein especially the teaching and executive character of his official work as a Priest is brought to our attention. In Chap. II we called attention to the fact that Eleazar, Aaron's son, represents for the Jewish Harvest the twelve Apostles and for the Gospel Harvest Bro. Russell. It is what Jesus said to the Apostles, as to their official powers (Matt. 18: 18), and what He said of our Pastor, as to his official powers (Matt. 24: 45-47; Luke 12: 43-46), that convinces us that what is said of Eleazar in Num. 4: 16 types the powers ascribed to the Apostles in Matt. 18: 18 and to our Pastor in Matt. 24: 45-47 and Luke 12: 43-46. The latter fact will appear as we apply the typical statements of Num. 4: 16 to the activities and powers of our Pastor as an executive and teacher. Here we will not expound this
passage as applying to the Twelve, as the Eleazar of the Jewish Harvest, since it is not pertinent to our subject; but will expound this passage of our Pastor, the Eleazar of the Gospel Harvest.
(16) In Num. 4: 16 seven executive and teaching functions of his are brought to our attention. The first of these is typed by Eleazar's having charge of the oil for the lampstand. Among other things, oil represents the spirit of understanding (Matt. 25: 3, 4, 8-10). The thing understood-of course, is the Truth. For Eleazar to have had charge of the oil for the lampstand would, therefore, type the thoughts: that it would be a privilege of our Pastor as teacher to understand the Truth not only for himself, but also for the brethren as enlighteners of one another, that he would shed this light on the teaching brethren, and that as an executive he would arrange for that understanding of the Truth to be made clear to the brethren in their capacity of enlightening the Church and to put into their hands helps that would enable them to learn and teach these truths. This teaching work he did by oral and written instructions and by providing Berean lessons on the pertinent literature, helpful in teaching these truths; and this executive work he did by publishing and distributing books, etc., that explained these truths, and by arranging for meetings and other class order wherein these truths might be taught. Certainly he did every one of these things and in so doing acted as teacher and executive in antitype of Eleazar's having charge of the oil for the lampstand.
(17) The second function ascribed in our text to Eleazar was his charge of the sweet incense. As Tabernacle Shadows shows (pp. 56, par. 2 and 62, par. 2), the unburnt sweet incense represents the actually perfect choice human powers of Jesus and the reckonedly perfect choice human powers of the Church, offered in sacrifice during the Gospel Age. Jesus' incense having long before been offered, our Pastor's charge could not
have included anything executive as to His actually perfect choice human powers in their being offered up from Jordan to Calvary. But it was a function of his to teach the pertinent facts on our Lord's human perfections offered by Him on the antitypical golden Altar. This he did, as his oral and written teachings prove. As executive he, of course, arranged for such teachings to reach the living brethren without acting as an executive toward them in their being offered up. He likewise taught orally and in writings all the pertinent matters respecting the reckonedly perfect human powers of the Church offered up before his time, though he as executive arranged for such teachings to reach the living brethren. But as to the Church of his day, he acted directly both as the teacher and executive with respect to its sweet incense. His teaching function in this respect he fulfilled by explaining justification by faith as reckoning perfection to our human all through Jesus' imputed merit, consecration as our consequent privilege and reasonable service, and the various things implied in, related to, and flowing from the sacrifice of our human all even unto death. Thus he discharged the teaching function of his charge with respect to the antitypical sweet incense. As executive he discharged his pertinent function by arranging for forms of service adapted to the exercise of the brethren's choice human powers—their various human abilities, influence, positions, reputations, time, strength, health, means, etc. Thus, the various forms of service—pilgrim, colporteur, volunteer, bereaved, sharpshooter, photodrama, Bible House, etc., work severally gave opportunities for the use of the brethren's divers talents, influence, positions, reputation, time, strength, etc. His use of the money that they entrusted to his administration in publishing and circulating literature, supporting various agencies of the work, providing advertisements for the public meetings and other expenses connected with meetings, securing space in newspapers
and magazines and meeting expenses for correspondence and other features of the work, is another illustration of his acting as an executive as to his charge of the antitypical sweet incense; for thereby the brethren's incense was offered.
(18) The third charge of Eleazar as our text sets it forth concerned the continual meat-offering, or according to a better translation, the meal-offering. See A.R.V. When, as in our text, the drink-offering is not mentioned, it is to be understood as included in the meal-offering. The meat-or meal-offering, as we have seen, represents that phase of our sacrifices which shows with what they occupy themselves, i.e., the setting forth of the Truth, like lecturing on and preaching the Truth by the pilgrims and auxiliary pilgrims, preaching and teaching the Truth by elders, colporteuring and lending the Truth literature by colporteurs, sharpshooters, etc., volunteering the Truth by volunteers and bereaved workers, publishing the Truth in newspapers and magazines, as well as circulating them, answering Truth questions, giving individuals oral testimonies conversationally on the Truth, furthering the photodrama work, serving as members of the Bible House and Bethel, doing the office and home work associated with the spread of the Truth, and supporting and encouraging others in the above forms of spreading the Truth. In discharging the teaching function of this phase of his office our Pastor had to write the Truth literature and teach the Truth to the above-described kinds of workers orally as well as with the printed page, by lectures, sermons, question meetings, conversation and letter writing. As executive he discharged this phase of his office by arranging for the various above-described forms of service whereby the Truth was spread, as well as by appointing the various persons to their pertinent forms of service in Truth spreading, doing this in some cases directly, e.g., pilgrims, colporteurs, etc., in others indirectly through
others, e.g., elders, volunteers, volunteer captains, by pruning out unfit persons among these workers and by arranging for them to have all the needed helps in the way of literature, fields of service, finances, encouragement, counsel, etc. The fulfilled facts prove that he executed both of his powers in this phase of his work.
(19) Eleazar's fourth duty as described in our text was to care for the anointing oil. The anointing oil types the Holy Spirit from the standpoint of its qualifying us for the Christ class service. The ingredients of the antitypical anointing oil as qualifiers for service are succinctly described in Is. 11: 2. The contents of this description may be stated as follows: the qualities of wisdom, justice, love and power each developed individually, each developed in balance with the others and in this balance all of them controlling all our other qualities (2 Peter 1: 5-8), fit us for our ministry as the Christ. As the Gospel-harvest Eleazar our Pastor's charge in this respect as teacher was to instruct the Church as to the nature of the anointing, of the anointed class, of their duties, privileges in knowledge, service, development and sufferings, and of their prospects. This he abundantly did in the Volumes and Towers especially, as well as by his oral ministry. Everything that he taught on the development of the graces as to their uses in service belonged to his teaching charge as respects the antitypical anointing oil. His teachings on the quickening, development, strengthening and balance of the Spirit, so far as they concerned qualification for service, also belong under this head. His charge as executive on this head required him to supervise the work of appointing qualified persons to the various forms of service. He did this directly in the case of pilgrims, colporteurs, photodrama workers, Bible House and Bethel workers, managers of the foreign branches and newspaper workers. He did this indirectly in the case of elders, deacons, volunteer captains, volunteers, sharpshooters and photodrama
ushers, by advising as to their qualifications and against accepting and continuing the disqualified in the pertinent service. He also exercised this function of his office as executive directly and indirectly by keeping, and advising against keeping persons from entering services for which they were not qualified and by dismissing, or advising dismissing from such services those who later proved themselves as having become unfit therefore. On this, his fourth official function, the facts prove that he fulfilled the type in his work as that Servant, as he did in other respects.
(20) The fifth charge of Eleazar was the Tabernacle itself, i.e., the whole structure, while it was standing, was under his superintendency. The tabernacle, of course, in its holy and most holy, types the Church militant and triumphant, as new creatures, and in its court, the humanity of the new creatures and the household of faith. For the Gospel-harvest Eleazar this would mean that our pastor had in a teaching and executive way charge of the new creatures during the reaping and gleaning time, yea, until Oct. 30, 1916, when in the toga scene he resigned his office as having been completely fulfilled. It would likewise mean that he had the teaching and executive charge of their justified humanity undergoing sacrifice, as represented by the court, as well as that he was the proper one to teach, and to point out the work of the tentatively justified during that period. He fulfilled his charge of the antitypical Holy by teaching and directing the Church as God's habitation in its mission as such. His charge of the antitypical Most Holy during the Parousia was to teach with respect to it the Truth then due to be known by the Church this side of the veil, and to act on this side of the veil as the executive hand of God and the Christ beyond the veil; but during the Millennium this charge will imply his teaching and directing the glorified Church as Jesus' special representative in its Millennial work. Each of the twelve Apostles
will act under his direction as a teacher and a director of one of the twelve tribes of Spiritual Israel and through them of the twelve tribes of Millennial Israel—the world. Thus the twelve brethren who were the Jewish Harvest Eleazar will be on twelve thrones judging [directing; ruling] the twelve tribes of [Spiritual and Millennial] Israel (Luke 22: 30), in his charge as Jesus' special representative. Thus this type teaches that our Pastor will be the one on our Lord's right in the Kingdom. Thus we see that both antitypical Eleazar will be in charge of the Most Holy, each of the Apostles, under our Lord, over a tribe of it, and the Parousia Messenger, under Him, over the whole of it, including the twelve Apostles.
(21) The sixth charge of Eleazar was the holy furniture. This is implied in part by the expression, "and all that is therein," and by what is meant by the expression translated, "in the sanctuary." We understand the translation of the last two phrases of our text, as the explanation of the preceding phrase, "and all that therein is," to be the following: in respect to the holy [furniture] and in respect to its vessels. The word kodesh here cannot be the holy or most holy, for these are implied in the term tabernacle previously used. The term, its vessels, is implied in part by, as it is also a part of the apposition to the expression, "and all that therein is." What was the rest of that which was among "all that therein" was? The holy furniture, of course. Hence we see that the last two phrases of v. 16 are appositional to the expression, "all that therein is," and therefore is explanatory of it. Hence the furniture's vessels being meant by the last phrase, the furniture must be meant by the next last phrase. Therefore Eleazar's sixth charge was the holy furniture— the two altars, the laver, the lampstand, the table and the ark. Therefore, the antitypical Eleazar's (our Pastor's) charge was their antitypes. The antitypical Brazen Altar being the Christ's humanity in its work
of comforting, encouraging, strengthening, correcting and restraining, as each case may require, the humanity of the anointed brethren as it was and is being sacrificed, our Pastor's charge as to this Altar was as teacher to teach the brethren their privileges as to using their human all in such a way as to comfort, encourage, strengthen, correct, warn and restrain the humanity of one another as each case required, while it was being sacrificed for the Lord's cause. This he often did in his oral and written teachings, as well as by his example. His charge of this Altar as executive was exercised in supervising such comforting, strengthening, encouraging, correcting, warning and restraining work, which he did by encouraging and directing the brethren in the use of their human all in this way and by hindering a contrary course on their part. His teaching charge of the antitypical Golden Altar, the New Creatures in their capacity of encouraging, comforting, strengthening, correcting, warning and restraining the sacrificing and suffering New Creatures (Heb. 10: 32-39), was exercised by his explaining, proving, illustrating, etc., the privileges of the brethren to use their new-creaturely powers, etc., encourage, strengthen, correct, warn and restrain, as each case required, their new-creaturely brethren amid their sacrificial sufferings; while his executive charge of the antitypical Golden Altar was fulfilled by his encouraging the new creatures to, and directing them in such work.
(22) As we have seen, the laver types the Bible—God's inspired Word. Its base and shaft type the Old Testament as the foundation of the New Testament and its bowl types the New Testament as the superstructure of the Old Testament. The water in the bowl types the truths of the Bible in their cleansing respects. Our Pastor's executive charge of the antitypical Laver, therefore, means that the Bible was placed in his care in order that he might preserve it, commend it and make it influential and see to it that