"[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)."
1 comment:
In answer to the first question posed, i.e., why do they not "prove all things"? It seems evident that they have abdicated their responsibility to follow the dictates of the scriptures. As they do not "prove all things" as they should and as Bro. Russell emphatically encouraged the brethren to do. These brethren have tactically agreed to play "follow the leader". By doing so they can feel secure in their consecration as they say the Lord's people have never been without a leader????? It’s too bad this leader and the proposed new leader seem to be going in such an errant direction. As Bro. Jolly said in his talk entitled the “Crown of Pride” they are drunk with the wine of their own errors. Some day these leaders will have to answer to the Lord for abandoning the truth given by that wise and faithful servant and leading others astray with their prideful twisted inventions. Also the brethren being led astray will bear their own amount of responsibility for going against what they should have proved and followed for themselves. We each individually bear the responsibility for our own consecration and character development. No one bears it for another as bro. Russell so succinctly pointed out in many places.
In answer to the second query as to bro, Johnson, Jolly, and Goulke's articles going against the "new readjusted thinking". He is simply readjusting his thinking and is abandoning whatever goes against his new readjusted thinking. Why should he settle for just what was written when he can look so much deeper and twist previous proper bible based truths into “new thinking.
May God bless us all in our prayerful study of His word as we seek to serve Him and to “prove all things and hold fast to that which is good”.
Post a Comment