Actual and Tentative imputation

(17) God instructed that in such cases the leaders of His Gospel-Age people, as their representatives, should indicate openly His repentant people's faith in Jesus' perfect humanity as their substitute before Divine justice and their only hope for forgiveness (the elders ... shall lay their hands upon the head of the bullock, v. 15). Among such leaders of His people were Arius, Claudius of Turin, Berengar of Tours, Peter Abelard, Peter Waldo, Marsiglio, John Tauler, Wyclif, John Huss, Savonarola, Wessel, Luther, Zwingli, Hubmaier, Servetus, Cranmer, John Wesley, etc. During the Gospel Age, Jesus as High Priest has held His merit available for actual and tentative imputation on behalf of His people (bullock shall be killed), and has actually imputed as much of it as was necessary to satisfy justice fully for the Spirit-begotten ones among God's people (vs. 16, 17)... PT 1965 Page 41

Tentative Justification In The Camp

TENTATIVE JUSTIFICATION IN THE CAMP - PT. 1963 - Page 45

(5) Question: Where do either Bro. Russell or Bro. Johnson teach that Tentative Justification ever has been—or ever will be—represented in the Camp, as you now teach it with respect to your Campers Consecrated?

Answer: Here again is a question that anyone who regularly reads and understands THE PRESENT TRUTH would not need to ask, for the P.T. has given much evidence to this effect. It has repeatedly called attention to Bro. Russell's teaching that tentative justification precedes consecration and that consecration is always in order, that "nothing short of full consecration will ever be proper"; he stated also that "full consecration will be required of those who would live and enjoy the blessings of the Millennial Age—nothing short of it" (Z 1113, par. 6; 5761, col. 2; F 156). Thus he showed that in the end of the Age, after the "readjustment" would take place and those tentatively-justified ones who did not go on to consecration would be remanded to the Camp, there would be tentative justification; however, it would be pictured, not in the Court, but in the Camp. In P '59, p. 41, we set forth clearly his teaching on tentative justification being pictured in the Camp after the Gate to the Court is forever closed, that it would operate even in the Millennial Age (it will operate then in the sense of a tentative actual justification), that "the world might then be said to be tentatively justified" (Z 5959, par. 6), and that "every one of that time who will be in the right way, and seeking to be in harmony with the Lord, will be said to be tentatively justified" (Ques. Book, p. 402, bottom). Yet in the face of all this J.J.H. asks where Bro. Russell ever taught that tentative justification ever has been—or ever will be—represented in the Camp! Indeed, none is so blind as he who will not see.

Bro. Johnson also taught that consecration is always in order (E 4, p. 420), and that tentative justification (in its pre-restitution sense—tentative faith justification, for the pre-Millennial seed, including the quasi-elect) would operate "until restitution begins" (E 4, p. 346; P '59, pp. 40, 41)—but not "for Gospel-Age purposes" after 1954, when the Youthful Worthy call would end (E 10, p. 114; E 11, pp. 473, 494, top) and when the Great Company's attestatorial work of building up the Epiphany Camp would begin (P '54, pp. 57, 58), by their (the Youthful Worthies co-operating) witnessing to those outside the Court, "whereby the Epiphany Camp, which will consist of the loyal justified [italics ours] and the converted loyal Jews ['Gentile and Jewish believers'—E 9, p. 156], by the Kingdom witness will be constructed" (E 10, p. 672; comp. E 14, p. 266). He showed that the antitypical Levites in the Epiphany Court would after their cleansing witness to those in the Epiphany Camp, that they would hold up the Curtain (which "represents Christ as Savior and King") "to the view of all in the Camp" (E 5, p. 420; T 114; see also P '58, pp. 60, 61; '63, pp. 28-30).

It would seem that the questioner, who in his sifting activities opposes the teachings of Bro. Russell and Bro. Johnson on tentative justification ever being represented in the Camp (just as J.F. Rutherford from another standpoint opposed Bro. Russell's teachings on tentative justification—E 4, pp. 336-358; E 6, pp. 165-170, 189-204), would make them both appear ridiculous, as false prophets: Bro. Russell, because he claimed that tentative justification will be pictured even in the Millennial Camp; and Bro. Johnson also, because he taught that tentative justification would operate "until restitution begins," and that after 1954, in the Great Company's Attestatorial Service, the antitypical Levites in the Epiphany Court would hold up the Curtain, "Christ as Savior and King," "to the view of all in the Camp," to thus build up the Camp—but, as J.J.H. would have it, holding it up fruitlessly, without winning any to justification, without even one person in the Camp ever coming to believe in Jesus as Savior and King, and therefore without any Epiphany Camp thus being built up at all, but consisting only of those rejected from the Court.

Readjust Our Thinking?

Here is another example that the Bible Standard Ministries is not upholding the Parousia and Epiphany Truth. How do those brethren who associate with this group allow for this and not "prove all things" as they should? The most recent PT, column 2, paragraph 2:

"[Please note! This article was written at a time when Bro. Russell was just beginning to recognize that not only the Church was covered by the imputation of the merit but that also the Great Company would need that cover and that the application for the world would have to wait until the death of these two classes before Restitution could begin. He had no thoughts concerning the Youthful Worthies much less Consecrated Epiphany Campers. This is a good illustration of how the Truth is progressive (Prov. 4: 18) and the need for us to readjust our thinking.]"

How can the current Executive Trustee assume "thinking Christians" are going to accept this premise? He uses Proverbs 4: 18, yet neglects to use the harmonious progressive Truth given by God's servants after Bro. Russell.

What about Bro. Johnson's thoughts on the matter? Perhaps he should consider looking at E Vol 8. Pages 619 to 620, paragraph 15.

What about Bro. Jolly's thoughts on the matter? From a PT in 1965, "...Jesus as High Priest has held His merit available for actual and tentative imputation on behalf of His people (bullock shall be killed), and has actually imputed as much of it as was necessary to satisfy justice fully for the Spirit-begotten ones among God's people (vs. 16, 17)..."

What about Bro. Gohlke? "High Priest—For All. Question (1980)—Who is the High Priest for 'Those Consecrating Between the Ages' (R 5761)? Answer.—Jesus as High Priest offered up His humanity, the antitypical atonement day bullock (Lev.16), and in His sacrificial death went under the antitypical second veil and then in His resurrection rose up a Divine being in the Most Holy (Heb. 10: 19, 20). There after His ascension He sprinkled the antitypical bullock’s blood on the mercy seat and consequently the blessings of Pentecost came to His disciples. He appeared in the presence of God 'for us,' the Church of the Firstborn, the Little Flock and the Great Company (Heb. 9: 24; T 59), and imputed His Ransom merit on their behalf. Also, He makes a tentative imputation for 'Those Consecrating Between the Ages' (comp. E. 4, p. 408)."

Opened and Unlocked?

The Pilgrim representative of the Bible Standard Ministries who is confused about the imputed merit (see April 26 post), and has been named as being the next Executive Trustee, is also confused about our writings. He seems to think that Bro. Johnson was not explaining the truth, but in fact was hiding away information to be "opened and unlocked" at a later date. Here is a portion of a  discourse he gave recently, transcribed from the audio copy:

“1 Peter 4:18. Because really we're getting some consideration to ones that are found righteous by God. We've all studied and recognized that as the last 15 or 20 years have come along, we've began to find understanding that was written back as far as 1934 in PT articles and so on, that is explaining where we are today. Brother Ralph has been bringing some of these thoughts a little bit to the forward, and its been causing just a little bit of unrest because its, again, its a new thought in the minds. But in my research I've found most of these thoughts back in 1934. It's like many things in our writings until it was time for them to be opened and unlocked, they were secret even though they were there, we didn't understand them.”