Questions for the ET

Dear Bro. R.M. Herzig, Executive Trustee, L.H.M.M:

Why do you continue to emphasize that the arrangements have been violated? Why do you fail to answer any questions when truth references are presented to you that deny your contention that the Youthful Worthies began as individuals in 1878 and began as a class in 1881?

You have to admit that there were no issues prior to 2004. In fact, issues started when you took the Executive Trustee (ET) position in 2004. There is nothing wrong with using truth writings to present the truth. But, when you begin altering the truth writings deliberately to change the intent, by inserting 1878 for example, and adding and expressing ones own unfounded thoughts is wrong!

General questions to blog readers:

Why did the current ET, who is a non-spirit begotten consecrated individual, change the intent of an article entitled “Quasi Elect” PT 1978, p. 50 as written by our beloved Bro. Jolly, a spirit begotten individual and spiritual leader.

• He deletes the following statements in bold: we take pleasure in republishing it here with "a number of important additions.” and here adds in italics: “few changes to reflect our present view.” Were the former servants wrong? Why the change? Was the former view wrong?

• Why do you suppose that he (ET) deleted this statement in bold? “ ( c ) the antitypical Court of the Epiphany Tabernacle and Temple "in the finished picture--- have as a class been in the process of development (see E-4, The Epiphany's Elect;”)
• He follows this by adding in italics: “The Great Company has finished its course and has now received the spirit nature (Rev. 7: 1-14). The Youthful Worthies, as the last elect class, has been in the process of development since their inception in 1878 (see E 4, The Epiphany's Elect, pp. 372-376; PT No. 519).”  

THIS WASN'T BRO. JOLLY'S THOUGHT CONCERNING THE YOUTHFUL WORTHIES! HE NEVER IN ANY OF HIS WRITINGS CLAIMED 1878 AS THE INCEPTION DATE FOR THE YOUTHFUL WORTHIES. HE CONSISTENTLY WROTE AND SPOKE 1881 AS INDIVIDUALS AND 1914 AS A CLASS.

 

AS A SPIRIT BEGOTTEN GREAT COMPANY MEMBER, WOULDN'T YOU THINK HE WOULD KNOW THE CORRECT DATES?  OR, ACCORDING TO THE CURRENT (ET'S) DEFINITION, WAS HE A SIFTER TOO?

Prior to 2004, our former servants placed their thoughts in italics and in brackets when making changes. This is something that the current ET has not done.

In addition to making changes to the Quasi Elect article, their have been other PT articles that he has changed, including Bro. Johnson's 1913 discourse. Does he feel that this is what Bro. Johnson should have said? When does a lower class have the right to change the intent of the writings of a higher class? Bro. Jolly always taught relating to the YWs the dates of 1881 as the beginning and 1914 as becoming a class. He also taught that the YWs could not be a known as a separate and distinct class while the Little Flock were still being reaped.

Are we going to ignore this? How do we harmonize this?

Summer 2006 PT:

The Article is Deceptive: What is the correct date for the beginning of the Youthful Worthy call? Why are there differing views on it? 1878 or 1881? The Youthful Worthy call was a forty year period ending on September 16th, 1954. The writer later in the article takes the attention away from his original premise, the word "Call" and modifies the word "Class". This tactic throws the reader off from the root meaning of the question. What is the correct date for the Youthful Worthy Call?

If you are an Epiphany Bible Student, ask yourself this question: How long was the Youthful Worthy Call? If the Youthful Worthy call began in 1881 as the current ET wishes us to believe, then we have to rewrite the Epiphany Truth and add 33 years to the 40 year call to make this error work.

Example: Notice below the subtle topic change from "Call" to "Class" by the current ET. Notice the change of thought moving this Epiphany (1914) Class to the Parousia (1881).

Summer 2006 PT on page 21-C2 the article so states “Please note, that this above insert is describing classes, not individuals, who are separate from group affiliation, and it emphasizes the fact that the Youthful Worthies are developed as a class from 1881 onward, which supports our contention that they were first recognized as coming into existence as individuals from 1878 and later as a class in 1881, not in 1914.”

Additional thoughts addressing the word "Class"

The example above does not harmonize with other truth references, such as Bro. Jolly's discourse at the 1970 Chicago Convention entitled “Jehovah The Keeper of Israel”. “The Youthful Worthies were developing as a class, a distinct class, that consecrated after spirit begettal ended in 1914 and from 1914 for the next forty years until 1954. Here we have the Great Company developing as a class and the Youthful Worthies developing as a separate class also.” Sr. Carla Olson has the tape.

Concerned Epiphany Bible Student  

Continued - See comments for additional information.

New Class in God's Plan Developing

PT February 1919, Page 34--"Before the General Call to the Divine nature and joint-heirship with Christ ceased in 1881, the persons that we call the "Youthful Worthies" did not exist as individuals of a class; but since that time [the date given, 1881] they [plural, these persons or individuals] have been [in existence] and now [when written, in the Epiphany] are coming as such [a class] into existence, and are showing some evidence of existence as such [a class]. Yea, we expect them to become shortly very marked as a class, separate and distinct from the Little Flock and the Great Company. The reason for their coming into existence as a class, though undiscerned hitherto as such, is that, since the General Call ceased, more people have consecrated to the Lord than can be provided with crowns from among those that wait as aspirants; and therefore the surplus consecrators were not begotten of the Spirit."

The title of this blog entry is the subtitle for the above text in the original PT reference. It indicates a NEW class (not an old one) in development during the Epiphany. Also, covered in a previous blog entry, please note the proper meaning of “individuals of a class” in the dependent clause (in blue, within brackets). “As such” is not a substitute for “therefore.” Rather, “such” must refer to an antecedent noun or noun phrase in order for “as such” to make grammatical sense. As a test, ask yourself “as what?”

Cornelius

Acts 10:22 And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of thee

The call of Cornelius ended the exclusive favor to natural Israel; and the call that went out in Oct. 1881 ended the exclusive favor to spiritual Israel, which was brought about by the call of people outside of the churches as well as in the churches. Let no one, from this statement, understand us to mean that nobody was any longer called to Bride-ship with Christ after 1881; for such a special call was extended to individuals in and out of the churches until the full number of the Elect in Sept. 1914 was fixedly complete, even as the call of Cornelius and other Gentiles in Oct. 36 did not exclude individual Jews from the call thereafter, though it ended Israel's exclusive favor. But we do mean that as the fulness of the Gentiles probationarily came in by the Spring of 1878 (Rom. 11: 25), and as some of them fell away from their steadfastness by Oct. 1881, only such a number of subsequent respondents to the invitation to consecrate could be Spirit-begotten as were needed to take the crowns lost by those who fell away from their steadfastness. But hundreds of thousands consecrated, while only a few thousand crowns were available, and thus there were more consecrators than available crowns. For the surplus consecrators the Lord has provided Youthful Worthiship. Therefore ever since 1881 those surplus consecrators have been forming a new class in God's Plan. And as since just after mid-September 1914 the fulness of Gentiles fixedly came in, i.e., since the full number of those who would prove faithful came in by that time, it follows that all consecrators since that time are probationarily Youthful Worthies. For a few years yet this class will be forming and developing. E16, p. 127

Some Comments on Ruth

From PT August, 1940, Page 121. Blog comments are posted in blue, within brackets.

Ruth 1: PT '33 p. 82
1 There was a famine—Scarcity of new Truth from 1844 to 1874.
A certain man—Crown-lost leaders.
Bethlehem—Sphere of Bible Truth as due.
Country of Moab—Nominal church.
His wife—Crown-lost ledlings.
Two sons—The more and the less faithful justified leaders.
2 Elimelech—(Powerful king) Crown-lost leaders who partook in the Miller movement, and who went back to the nominal church.
Naomi—(Pleasantness) Crown-lost ledlings.
Mahlon—(Sickly) The more faithful tentatively–justified leaders.
Chilion—(Pining) The less faithful tentatively-justified leaders.
3 Elimelech died—Swallowed up in worldly conditions, their New Creatures died.
4 Two sons took wives . . . of Moab—The justified leaders gathered leadable justified ones to themselves in the nominal church.
Orpah—(Stubborn) Less faithful justified ledlings.
Ruth—(Friendship) More faithful justified ledlings.
Abode ten years—Fullness of time to remain in the nominal church.
5 Mahlon and Chilion died—Swallowed up in worldly conditions, their justification lapsed.
6 The Lord had visited His people—God had renewed His favor.
Giving them bread—Giving the Parousia Truth.
7 She went forth . . . daughters-in-law—Became interested in the Truth then due, which separated their hearts and minds from the nominal church.
Return unto . . . Judah—Away from the nominal church and into the Truth movement again.
8 Return each to her mother's house—Crown-lost new creatures' acts gave these the thought that they should leave them and settle down to a comfortable life in the nominal church.
9 They . . . wept—Sorrow at prospect of parting.
10 We will return with thee—The two justified classes determined to advance toward the Truth. [Both Ruth and Orpah are referred to as classes. See also E4, page 371]
11 Why will ye go with me?—Antitypical Naomi's course raised in the minds of antitypical Orpah and Ruth the question, Why should we cease to work for, and to attend nominal-church meetings and do the opposite?
13 The hand of the Lord is gone out against me—This thought was in the antitype concluded from the crown-lost ledlings' unfruitful efforts with nominal-church people.
14 Orpah kissed her—Failure to meet the test and to advance indicated their desire to leave them. [Orpah advanced only so far on the journey, then returned.]
Ruth clave unto her—Overcame in the test and remained with the consecrated. [Ruth remained with the consecrated. She was not yet consecrated, since the comment makes a distinction between Ruth and Naomi.]
16 Whither thou goest, I will go—Types consecration of the faithful justified class following the crown-lost new creatures and leaving the nominal church. Youthful Worthies are not Spirit-begotten. [Ruth class is now consecrated. She could not have been before verse 16, as we would then have to conclude Orpah class was also consecrated during the earlier part of the journey.]
19 They two . . . came to Bethlehem—Persevered, advancing in the Truth and its Spirit. City was moved—The left-overs of the cleansed sanctuary class, as well as the Parousia class rejoiced.
Is this Naomi?—A class that went out and returned. [Naomi also noted as a class.]
20 Call me Mara: for the Almighty hath dealt very bitterly with me—Convinced the Lord had striped them for leaving God's cleansed people to return to Babylon.
21 I went out full . . . home again empty—Recognized loss of spirituality and spiritual privileges and associates.
22 Beginning of barley harvest—From 1878 to 1881.

Ruth 2:
1 Boaz—Our Lord.
3 Gleaned in the field . . . belonging unto Boaz—Zealous Youthful Worthies, not Spirit-begotten, from 1881 onward were given opportunities to serve in the Harvest under the Chief Reaper. [Since Youthful Worthies did not exist from 1878-81, logically none were available to be given opportunities to serve in the Harvest prior to 1881.]
4 Boaz came from Bethlehem—Our Lord coming from His activities of dispensing the Truth to the Church.
The Lord be with you—Blessed the reapers in their service of others.
5 Whose damsel is this?—Our Lord raised in Bro. Russell's mind the question as to who the unbegotten consecrators were; for the consecrated were more numerous than the available crowns. [Crowns were only available after the General Call ceased, from 1881 onward.]
6 Came back with Naomi out of . . . Moab—That Servant in Towers from 1881 onward pointed out an unbegotten class among the returning crown-lost new creatures. [Youthful Worthies existed from 1881 onward. If the word "class" is your tripping point, please be aware of its use above for Naomi, Ruth and Orpah. As structured here, the original comments beautifully show the correct view.]

Spirit-Begotten Consecrators

PT December 1937, Page 189--The Truth of itself did not beget of the Spirit; it did so only when God by a direct act of His will (Jas. 1: 18) empowered it so to do in each individual case. Hence, God willing it from Pentecost until 1878 in the case of all true consecrators, all such were Spirit-begotten. God not willing it for some from 1881 to 1914, the Truth did not beget such of the Spirit; and since God wills it for none since Oct., 1914, the Truth begets none of the Spirit since then.

This reference says nothing about Youthful Worthies from 1878-81. And, it was published within one year of E4.

Were the most of those who consecrated between April, 1878, and Oct., 1914, Spirit-begotten?

PT March 1945, Page 48--"We think that they were probably not in a majority among the consecrators; for none were Spirit-begotten between April, 1878, and Oct., 1881; and between Oct., 1881, and Oct., 1914, only such were Spirit-begotten as were needed to take the places of those whose crowns lapsed. Since the Youthful Worthies..."

Please see the complete reference for Youthful Worthy details. It separates the dates (as listed in the question) for when non-Spirit-begotten consecrated did not exist (1878-81) and could begin to exist (1881). This meaning can be easily verified by backing up only 70 pages to PT November 1944, Page 174 where it says: "St. Paul's words in 1 Cor. 2: 5-16 denying that the unbegotten of the Spirit are able to understand the deep things are limited to the time of the general call, during which to be Spirit-begotten and to be consecrated meant the same thing, hence all the consecrated were then Spirit-begotten, which was not the case before the call to the high calling opened. Hence, after the general call ceased St. Paul's pertinent words do not apply universally."

This lines up properly with the reference in E4 on page 469 (questions on the Youthful Worthies): "What St. Paul says in 1 Cor. 2: 14 does not contradict this; for between Pentecost and 1881, to which time alone his words are limited, all the consecrated were New Creatures; hence during that time the term New Creature and the term consecrated applied to the same persons and were interchangeable."

Question (March-April, 1963, Page 30)—After 1914, did not the truth on the Epiphany Court unfold beyond Bro. Russell’s expectations?

“… although Bro. Russell taught that consecration is always in order … and therefore understood that there would be some consecrators between the Ages … and though he saw Epiphany matters quite clearly in many other respects, he did not recognize that there would be more than one class in the Court in the Epiphany. This is not at all to his disparagement …, for the due time had not yet come for it to be understood more clearly.”

“After 1914 arrived, … the Lord made clear (through Bro. Johnson) that there was not only one class—the Great Company— but three classes in the post-1914 Court, during the Epiphany in its narrow, 40-year sense, as follows: (1) the unconsecrated tentatively justified (including many of them who came in from 1914 onward), who would not be remanded from the Court until 1954 (instead of 1914, as Bro. Russell had expected), (2) the Great Company, remanded from the Holy, and (3) the non-Spirit-begotten consecrated—the Youthful Worthies—who never had been in the Holy.”

If the current Executive Trustee’s “present view” is correct, then why did the Lord not make clear through Bro. Johnson or Bro. Jolly (who wrote the above reference) that there was a Youthful Worthy CLASS already in the court in the Parousia (pre-1914)? And wouldn't they discuss going from two classes to three classes?

A new standing or an old standing?

Standing is defined in the American Heritage Dictionary as the status with respect to rank, reputation, or position in society or a profession. In PT July-August 1961, Bro. Jolly applies this definition in the same fashion to the opening of two NEW classes.

Page 58: "Furthermore, after 1914 another completion—the ending of the Parousia in its narrow or restricted sense (the reaping period) and the close of the door of entrance into the High Calling—and another concomitant beginning—the beginning of the Epiphany period in its first lapping beginning and the opening of a new standing, i.e., Youthful Worthiship, for all new consecrators after 1914—began to be preached from the Scriptures and the Parousia Messenger's teachings by Bro. Johnson and others who joined him."

One paragraph later: "... the beginning of the Basileia (as a stage of our Lord's Second Advent) in its first lapping beginning and the opening of a new standing (i.e., as Consecrated Epiphany Campers) for all new consecrators after 1954—has been preached from the Scriptures and the Epiphany Messenger's teachings."

Changes vs. Additions to Truth

The current Executive Trustee’s “present view” of the dates for the existence of the Youthful Worthies was first expressed in print with his modification of the first paragraph of the quasi-elect article (we compare Bro. Jolly’s 1978 PT version to the ET’s 2004 version).

The First Sentence
In the first sentence, he replaces “additional light” with “considerable light” and thereby loses the meaning of adding to or building upon existing truth. This subtle alteration of meaning is confirmed with the replacement of “with a number of important additions” to “with few changes to reflect our present view” at the end of the sentence.

A, Then B, Then C
In the 1978 article, the rest of the first paragraph is a single sentence listing a sequence of events (A, B, C). The 2004 article keeps items A and B, but completely replaces Bro. Jolly’s item C with something new.

• 1978—“(c) the last two classes of the elect—the Great Company (Rev. 7: 14) and the Youthful Worthies, who constitute the antitypical Court of the Epiphany Tabernacle or Temple in the finished picture—have as classes been in the process of development (see E 4, The Epiphany's Elect; PT No. 519).”
• 2004—“(c) the antitypical Court of the Epiphany Tabernacle and Temple has been occupied by the Great Company and Youthful Worthies while in the flesh and is now inhabited solely by the Youthful Worthies.”

Notice how the 1978 version shows BOTH the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies developing AS CLASSES (not individuals) in the Epiphany. The 2004 version loses this parallel meaning completely. Even if one of the two classes is no longer in the flesh today, the 1978 item C is still grammatically accurate. Why the change?

The Error Introduced
The 2004 article then introduces two new sentences not found in the 1978 version. The first sentence completes the condition of the Great Company, while the second brings in the “present view” of the Youthful Worthies: “The Great Company has finished its course and has now received the spirit nature (Rev. 7: 1-14). The Youthful Worthies, as the last elect class, has been in the process of development since their inception in 1878 (see E 4, The Epiphany's Elect, pp. 372-376; PT No. 519).”

Notice how the development of the Youthful Worthies has been disassociated with the Great Company in item C and given its own focus in the second sentence. The parallel has been removed, the E 4 reference modified, and a date not previously used is brought into play. The 2004 version does, in fact, change the truth instead of adding to it.

Developed as classes at the same time.

"... in the Epiphany, or Apocalypse period. Then for the first time the Christ in all of its members came into a condition where the Oath-bound Covenant was confirmed to all of them, and the Great Company as the subordinate part of the heavenly seed and the Youthful Worthies as a part of the earthly seed began to be developed as classes, separate and distinct from the Little Flock and from each other."--PT July-August 1961, Page 54.

If the Great Company was not a class before the Epiphany (a truth not yet changed by the current Executive Trustee), how could the Youthful Worthies be a class before then? The above reference aligns their development as classes during the same time period.

As Respects The Youthful Worthies

"The antitypical Court will eventually consist of three classes: the Ancient Worthies, developed before the Gospel Age, and the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies, the two classes that as such are developed here in the Epiphany period, beginning in the Fall of 1914, which two classes therefore constitute the Epiphany Court (see, e.g., E 5, p. 420; P '40, pp. 13, 14; '59, pp. 34-36). Jesus as God's Executive has been in the process of building the Epiphany Court from 1914 onward, in His calling and development of the Youthful Worthy class and in His dealing with the Great Company as a class, in readying them for the Marriage Supper." --PT July-August 1964, Page 55.

Not only were both the Youthful Worthies and the Great Company developed AS CLASSES in the Epiphany, but the call for the Youthful Worthies began then too.

What was the special Parousia and Epiphany work?

Luke 12:37: Blessed are those servants, whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them.

"Since in the Parousia it was due to complete the development of the Little Flock, as the special Parousia work, naturally the Truth teachings of that time centered in Christ and the Church. And since in the Epiphany it is due to develop the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies, naturally the Truth teachings of this time center in these two classes. . . . And as things not due cannot be seen before they are due, so during the Parousia, specifically Epiphany truths could not be seen. Thus when the Parousia ended, 1914, all error was removed from the Parousia truths, i.e., the truths needed for the development of the Little Flock. But by the same token not all error was by 1914 removed from matters pertinent, to the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies. This will have taken place by 1954, each of these things being set forth respectively by the purification of the mother of a son in forty, and that of a mother of a daughter in eighty days (Lev. 12) . . . Hence as the Epiphany advances the immaturities on the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies of the Parousia and of the past Epiphany times give way to clearer light, even as this same principle operated during the Parousia as to its immaturities. Thus 'the path of the just is as a shining light that shineth more and more unto the perfect [full] day' (Prov. 4: 18). Accordingly, no new Truth for the development of the Little Flock for the Kingdom has come since the Parousia's end; all of it that has since come is for the development of the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies."

--Your Brother and Servant, PAUL S. L. JOHNSON. E5, p. iv.

The Transitional Period

Some read the following reference (reprinted in many PTs, such as 1920, 1924, 1927, etc.) and are confused as to the definition of the Transitional Period and those as persisting Gospel Age Levites. They simply need to compare this reference to other references, such as the ones shown below, in order to get clarification. "During the Transitional Period those Levites who will not consecrate lose their tentative justification—i.e., cease to be tentative Levites and are put out of the Court; while those who do consecrate, the Youthful Worthies, retain their tentative justification and remain in the Court as Gospel Age Levites of three groups, Kohathites, Merarites and Gershonites, throughout the Transitional Period. Additionally the Great Company becomes during this Transitional Period Levites of three groups, Kohathites, Merarites and Gershonites. But it must be kept in mind that the Great Company Transitional Levites are different from the Youthful Worthies as persisting Gospel Age Levites in the transition time."

Question Book, Page 500 (1943): "First of all, we must remember that there are three time sets of antitypical Levites: (1) the Gospel Age Levites, i.e., the tentatively justified Levites: (2) The Epiphany Levites, i.e., the vitalizedly justified Levites, i.e., the Great Company and the tentatively justified Levites, i.e., the Youthful Worthies; and (3) the Millennial and post-Millennial Age Levites, i.e., the Ancient Worthies, the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies."

In E. Vol. 4, p. 322 Bro. Johnson states that “During the Transitional Period [the Epiphany] those Levites, the tentatively justified, who will not consecrate lose their tentative justification, i.e., cease to be tentative Levites and are put out of the Court.”

Antitypical Sarah, Rachel, and Hannah: In Time of Producing Their Children

PT 1973, P. 44: "(1) antitypical Sarah was active from Jordan until The Christ left the world; (2) antitypical Rachel, the same period for The Christ, and for the Great Company as individuals, from shortly after Pentecost onward, and as a class from Nov. 25, 1916—Jan. 14, 1917 onward until the Great Company leaves the world; (3) antitypical Hannah, the same periods for The Christ and the Great Company respectively and for the Youthful Worthies as individuals from Oct 1881 onward to Sept. 16, 1914, and as a class from Sept. 16, 1914 onward until they leave the world finally."

The "present view" held by the current Executive Trustee renders inaccurate the second highlighted area of this reference. See also PT 1938, Page 56 and E13, Page 20. For those of you who have the 'knee-jerk' reaction to suggest that Bro. Johnson or Bro. Jolly had two views, please supply this blog with an article where either one discusses this idea.

Conditions Among Truth Brethren

PT 1978, Jan-Feb, Page 7: "...others are returning to these teachings on the Parousia 40-year Harvest period for the reaping of the Little Flock, from 1874 to 1914, followed by the Epiphany, or Apocalypse, period, the Time of Trouble, during which the Great Company as such comes up out of the great tribulation, washing their robes in the blood of the Lamb, and during which God has been developing those consecrating between the Ages (Z5761), the Spirit-enlightened, non-Spirit-begotten class...," and, "More and more brethren now accept his teachings relating to the Youthful Worthy class and are coming to see that the High Calling, to Little Flockship, must by this late date surely be finally closed."

Please note the order of events as listed in the Fifty-Ninth Annual Report as to when the Youthful Worthies are developed as a class.

Promised Epiphany Truth

PT 1969 Page 27 C1: "The Lord never promised to give the Epiphany Truth to all who will eventually become Youthful Worthies: Many 1914-1954 consecrators in and out of Babylon have died and are dying without getting the Epiphany Truth pertaining to the Youthful Worthy call. Hence it may be said that they have not really known the hope of their calling—they have not realized that the door is closed, that they have not been made "partakers of the heavenly calling" (Heb. 3: 1), and that the ye of Eph. 4: 4 does not apply to them."

If there were Youthful Worthy individuals between 1878-81 or a Youthful Worthy class from 1881-1914 (as stated by the current Executive Trustee), why would the above reference not mention either of them?

What is the correct date for the beginning of the Youthful Worthy Call?

PT 1951, p. 135, col., 1
"Thus the material was all ready, initially, for the Epiphany temple by the Fall of 1914; and, as Bro. Johnson indicates in E Vol. 11, p. 493, the work of building the Epiphany tabernacle, or temple (frequently used interchangeably—. E Vol. 8, p. 623), "had its beginning in the call of the Youthful Worthies from 1914 onward." Hence we are warranted in beginning the time of the laying of the foundations of the Epiphany temple in the Fall of 1914."

PT 1951, p. 135, col., 2
"As already seen (in the third and fourth preceding pars.), the work of building the Epiphany temple had its first beginnings in the Fall of 1914 with the call of the Youthful Worthies. The Youthful Worthies will all be appointed by Oct. 1954, after which no more Youthful Worthies will be won (E Vol. 10, p. 114; P '51, p. 90),..."

PT 1959, p. 56, col. 1
"These other leaders could not see, e.g., that a great step of progress in connection with the antitypical Tabernacle had set in—that beginning in the Fall of 1914 in the call of the Youthful Worthies as a class, God was building the Epiphany Tabernacle Court as distinct from the Holy..."

The above references show that PT 2006, p. 21, col. 2, p. 22, col. 1. denies the 1914 date.

Non-Essential Clauses?

This blog has helped to clarify the obvious meaning of the Ruth picture in E4 (see previous entries). Yet, some still attempt to prop up the Executive Trustee’s “present view” by the misapplication of portions of the antitype of Esther, specifically page 284 of E10: “After leaving the nominal church as Youthful Worthies, from 1878 onward, and coming into the Truth, these were as a class taken by Bro. Russell as a symbolic daughter.”

Providing Extra Information

While the two non-essential clauses in the sentence (in grammatical terms only, not in value) do not restrict its meaning, they do provide critical information in our understanding of the action. Set off with commas, Bro. Johnson provides BOTH “from 1878 onward” and “and coming into the Truth” to give us details as to when they became Youthful Worthies.

Had he supplied just the first clause, we would have to consider 1878 as the date when Bro. Russell took them as a symbolic daughter. But the second clause gives us another action that took place BEFORE that could happen. Since no date is given for the second clause, we must look elsewhere.

Luckily, that date is implied only two pages later in the continued application of the antitype: “… since from 1881 onward these things were not certain in individual cases, because all consecrators were not accepted into the high calling.” If all individual consecrations prior to 1881 were accepted into the high calling, then Youthful Worthy individuals could only exist from that date onward. This, of course, destroys the “present view” of there being individuals from 1878-81 and pushes it to the 1881-1914 time frame.

The “class” Word?

That leaves us with only one detail. Was Bro. Johnson using "class" to mean that there was a specific Youthful Worthy class in 1881 or was he referring to group of similar individuals? Again, the answer can be found nearby on Page 347 where it mentions Russell and Johnson, “for to the former belonged charge of all new creatures and the unbegotten consecrated as such during the Parousia, and to the latter belongs charge of the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies during the Epiphany.”

Clearly, we can see that there were only Youthful Worthy individuals from 1881 onward and a Youthful Worthy class from 1914 onward. Additional proof is shown also in E10 on pages iii, 209, 210, 250, 285, 658-659. See also the previous blog entry on Esther.

Who is the present day leader of God's People?

Rev. 17:14 "These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful."

Question ─ Did our Lord between 1954-1979 use the Great Company Leader (Bro. R. G. Jolly) to bring forth an attestatorial work by the antitypical Benjamin class for the development of the Epiphany Camp? Was this Truth sufficient to lead us into the times of restitution? What roll were the Youthful Worthies to have in this work during his life? And after he died? Were the Youthful Worthies to carry on the "the Great Company's message?"

Answer ─ The Great Company engaging in a special public work, toward Jews and Gentiles, for Epiphany Camp purposes, from the Fall of 1954 onward, in attestation of their purification having been accomplished, whereas the Youthful Worthies are not so pictured, though they are special assistants of the cleansed Great Company in this work, and may, following the directions of the Great Company, accomplish most of it, including especially its last phases, after the Great Company shall have left the earth. It is "the Great Company's attestatorial service" (P '54, pp. 54-59; '56, pp. 90-94). In E Vol. 4, p. 31 Bro. Johnson indicates from certain Scriptures that the Great Company "will have an exceedingly fruitful ministry when they as Jesus' agents gather the people into the camp condition of the Epiphany (Num. 8: 9)," and that this will be done by "the Great Company's message." P.T. 1960, p. 54.

Complete Assurance of Spirit-Begettal

Definition of Assurance (Merriam-Webster): the state of being assured: a being certain in the mind: confidence of mind or manner: easy freedom from self-doubt or uncertainty.

BS, August 1952, Page 68--"But how can one who has not experienced Spirit-begettal tell the difference between it and the witness of the Spirit which is granted in the case of the prospective Youthful Worthies? The latter is in many respects very similar to the former (see Christ-Spirit-Covenants, Chap. X). It may help us to appreciate the matter better if we bear in mind that ever since 1881 there has been no assurance of Spirit-begettal (F 156; see The Epiphany's Elect, pp. 419, 437)."

If there were fully-consecrated Youthful Worthies between 1878-1881, based on the "present view" of the Executive Trustee, then the above quote is incorrect. Everyone before 1881 had that assurance of Spirit-begettal, so there were no Youthful Worthies before that time (there were tentatively justified ones on their journey to full consecration).

What roll do the Youthful Worthies have in this attestatorial service?

July-August, 1960--"the Great Company's attestatorial service" (P '54, pp. 54-59; '56, pp. 90-94). In E Vol. 4, p. 31.

(42) The Great Company, as already shown, are typed in the maid child and its mother in Lev. 12; additionally, the mother's bringing her offering at the end of the 80 days in attestation of her purification having been accomplished, types the Great Company engaging in a special public work, toward Jews and Gentiles, for Epiphany Camp purposes, from the Fall of 1954 onward, in attestation of their purification having been accomplished, whereas the Youthful Worthies are not so pictured, though they are special assistants of the cleansed Great Company in this work, and may, following the directions of the Great Company, accomplish most of it, including especially its last phases, after the Great Company shall have left the earth. It is "the Great Company's attestatorial service" (P '54, pp. 54-59; '56, pp. 90-94). In E Vol. 4, p. 31 Bro. Johnson indicates from certain Scriptures that the Great Company "will have an exceedingly fruitful ministry when they as Jesus' agents gather the people into the camp condition of the Epiphany (Num. 8: 9)," and that this will be done by "the Great Company's message."

(43) Similarly, the Great Company has, according to Cant. 5: 8—6: l, been given the privilege of proclaiming the message to Fleshly Israel that in due time will result in their conversion. Bro. Johnson states that the Great Company's "preaching to Israel is described in vs. 10-16; and Israel's conversion in 6: 1. . . . In converting Israel through preaching the Word to them, the Great Company will be bringing a meat offering to the Lord in righteousness" (E Vol. 5, p. 421). Note that Bro. Johnson does not include the Youthful Worthies here, for Cant. 5: 8—6: 1 shows that this is the Great Company's work; however, the Youthful Worthies are the chief assistants of the cleansed Great Company in this work.

(44) Furthermore, the Great Company doing their clean work toward the public are typed by Miriam in her journeying with the people (Num. 12: 15), whereas the Youthful Worthies are not thus typed. Bro. Johnson writes, "Miriam's joining the people in journeying types the Great Company, especially in its leaders, doing the clean work that will be theirs after their cleansing—building the Epiphany Camp, first, from among the nominal-church believers after the nominal church is destroyed and, second, from among Fleshly Israel after they look upon Him whom they pierced and mourn for it (Zech. 12: 10). . . . Hence in the antitype Miriam will be in the antitypical journey, among other things engaging in her work of gathering Gentile and Jewish believers into the Epiphany Camp" (E Vol. 9, p. 156; P '54, p. 59). Thus this work is "their mission" (E Vol. 11, p. 713, line 6), though the Youthful Worthies as their special assistants may accomplish most of it, especially in its last phases, after the Great Company shall have left the earth.

GREAT COMPANY GIVEN STEWARDSHIP OF TRUTH
(45) The Great Company receives certain special prerogatives as antitypical Japheth. Bro. Johnson states (P '44, p. 29, col. 1, bottom): "The Parousia and Epiphany Messengers further have taught that God would greatly increase the Great Company in numbers, work and influence (enlarge Japheth, Gen. 9: 27), give them the public mouthpieceship that the Little Flock formerly had, give them the latter's Truth (dwell in the tents of Shem)." But the Youthful Worthies are not mentioned here at all, either in the public mouthpieceship or in the stewardship of the Truth. Since the Little Flock have all been taken from the earth the oracles of God have been committed into the care of the Great Company (comp. Rom. 3: 2). Therefore, while the storehouse of knowledge was during the Parousia placed into the charge of Bro. Russell, that "faithful and wise servant" (Matt. 24: 45-47; Luke 12: 42-44), and during the Epiphany into the charge of Bro. Johnson, the one who had the wisdom of Solomon antitypically (E Vol. 10, p. 667; P '53, pp. 13, 14; '54, p. 41), since the rapture of the last star-member and last Little Flock member from the earth (E Vol. 10, pp. 142, 610, 665) the storehouse of knowledge would logically be entrusted to the care of the next highest class of God's consecrated people, i.e., the Great Company.

(46) The Great Company (in the Good Levite group) as antitypical Benjamin receive the antitypical 300 pieces of silver, "the fullness of Truth for Great Company and Youthful Worthy matters" (Gen. 45: 22; E Vol. 10, p. 651; comp. P '56, pp. 29, 66, par. 2), whereas, as already shown, the Youthful Worthies are not included in antitypical Benjamin. Hence the Youthful Worthies should know where to look for "the fullness of Truth"—they will obtain it from the antitypical Benjamin class only, and not from any alleged "little Jesus" or other would-be leader of the Great Company and Youthful Worthies that may arise from their own midst. Since the fullness of Truth is given to the Great Company, antitypical Benjamin, for Great Company matters and also for Youthful Worthy matters, there is no room for a Youthful Worthy to truthfully claim either that he has the Truth Divinely given into his charge to dispense to the Great Company, or (while the Great Company is still in the flesh) that he has the Truth Divinely given into his charge to dispense to, the Youthful Worthies.

(47) Additionally, the Great Company (in the Good Levite group) as antitypical Benjamin receive the antitypical five changes of raiment, the "five sets of authorizations, with their pertinent qualities" (Gen. 45: 22; E Vol. 10, p. 651). These five sets of authorizations the Great Company receive seem clearly to represent their spheres of authority in service, i.e., toward (1) the Great Company, (2) the Youthful Worthies, (3) the Consecrated Epiphany Campers, (4) "the loyal tentatively justified" for the Epiphany Camp particularly, and (5) the "loyal Jews for the Epiphany Camp" (E Vol. 10, p. 649; P '59, pp. 37-41). Thus the Great Company are given the sphere of authority in service over the Youthful Worthies, and not vice versa.

ANTITYPICAL HIRAM: BROTHER JOLLY IS THE PRESENT DAY LEADER OF GOD'S PEOPLE
(66) The same thing is shown by the fact that the Epiphany Messenger pointed out the one typed by Baanah as in the Epiphany application being typed also by Hiram the king, who was "ever a lover of David" (who types Bro. Russell) and assisted in building him a house (1 Kg. 5: 1-3; 2 Chro. 2: 3; P '53, pp. 23, col. 2, par. 1, 91, 92), and additionally was Solomon's (in the antitype, Bro. Johnson's) special helper in building the temple, as well as in other enterprises (1 Kg. 5—10; 2 Chro. 2—9). . . . The executive office function is shown more particularly in the office functions of Hiram the king, though the teaching feature is not excluded, for king Hiram sent to king Solomon "six score talents of gold"—Divinely approved matters pertaining to the Little Flock, and to the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies (1 Kg. 9: 14; P '54, p. 22, col. 2, top).

(67) . . . . Antitypical Hiram the artisan is "a master workman in matters pertaining to the Divine (skilful to work in gold, 2 Chro. 2: 14), the Truth (silver), justification (brass), strong connectives (iron), new creatures (stone), corruptible human nature (timber), royalty (purple), faithfulness (blue), the righteousness of the saints (fine linen) and the Ransom and Sin-offerings (crimson), also skilful in developing the various fruits and graces of the Spirit (also to [en] grave any manner of [en] graving) and to plan and execute any project that might be assigned him (to find out every device which shall be put to him)" (P '53, p. 25, par. 1). For further details, see P '53, pp. 23-25, 54-56, 91, 92; '54, pp. 24, 42-44; '55, p. 84; '56, pp. 80-84; '58, pp. 31, 32. Both offices—Hiram the king and Hiram the artisan—were (in their Epiphany application) clearly set forth by the Epiphany Messenger as belonging only to the present leader of the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies.

Surely Brother Jolly has given us all the Truth up until the Times of Restitution. Psa. 112: 6

Present-Day Leadership of God's People

Who is the present day Spiritual Leader of the Lord's people? Can someone self-proclaim and self-appoint to leadership? What new Truth's are being given? Has the fullness of Truth been given on the GC and YW? Has the fullness of Truth been given on the building of the Epiphany Camp? Are there seventy proofs in PT whole #48 that prove Bro. Jolly as the Spiritual Leader? What are the present day duties and responsibilities of the (good) Youthful Worthies and Consecrated Epiphany Campers? Excerpts from PT July-August 1960 page 50 answer any questions:

(1) The Great Company are Spirit-begotten (Rev. 19: 1-9; 7: 13-15; E Vol. 4, pp. 115-117), whereas the Youthful Worthies "do not have the Holy Spirit of begettal" and, therefore, "do not have a sympathetic appreciation of the operation of the Spirit of begettal in the heart" (E Vol. 4, pp. 412, 440).

(2) The Great Company are typed by some of those born in the land, i.e., they are Spirit-begotten ones, whereas the Youthful Worthies, a lower class, are typed by the "strangers in the land," dwelling in it, but not born in it (Num. 9: 14; E Vol. 8, p. 619).

(3) The Great Company, in those members who are "the good crown-losers," are typed by Naomi, one born in the land, an Israelite, whereas the Youthful Worthies are typed by Ruth, a "stranger in the land" who was born a Moabite (E Vol. 4, p. 374).

(4) The Great Company, particularly the Good Levites in their cleansed condition, are "able to feed on what they once had [the antitypical shewbread] while in the Holy" (E Vol. 4, p. 128, bottom), while they shared in the anointing. But the Youthful Worthies never were in the Holy, hence cannot feed on such things, nor did they ever share in the anointing. Bro. Johnson states, . . . (E Vol. 4, pp. 129, 468).

(5) The Great Company have had their justification vitalized by the actual imputation of Christ's merit, and are now on trial for life, whereas the Youthful Worthies' justification is tentative, and they do not have the actual imputation of Christ's merit (E Vol. 4, pp. 344, 345), nor are they now on trial for life.

(6) The Great Company's vitalizedly-justified standing is pictured in the Inner Court of Solomon's Temple, which was closest to the Holy and Most Holy, whereas the Youthful Worthies' lower, tentatively-justified standing is pictured in the Great or Outer ("utter") Court, which was farther away from the Holy and Most Holy (1 Kg. 6: 36; 7: 12; P '53, p. 53, par. 6; comp. Ezek. 10: 5; 42: 1-3; 44: 19).

(7) The former's standing in the Inner Court is higher than that of those in the Outer Court, because, additionally, the Inner Court was "the higher court" (Jer. 36: 10), i.e., its elevation was above that of the Outer Court.

(40) The Great Company are the main part of antitypical Elisha, who since 1917 is the successor of antitypical Elijah, the Little Flock, as God's mouthpiece to Nominal Spiritual Israel and the world, whereas the Youthful Worthies are the subordinate part (E Vol. 3, pp. 7, 185-187). Because this public mouthpieceship was given chiefly to the Great Company, the Epiphany Messenger in referring to the matter frequently did not even mention the Youthful Worthies' part.

More Truth "As Such"

PT. 1926, Page 186: "The brethren who err on the meaning and implication of our Pastor's having charge of the storehouse do not understand the function of his office. He was the Parousia messenger, appointed by the Lord over the storehouse and the household for Parousia purposes--giving the Parousia Truth and superintending the Parousia work. Thus he gave the Church the full Parousia Truth, and superintended the full gathering of the Church (hence he can have no successor), and thereby gave the foundation of the Epiphany Truth and work; for the Parousia Truth and work are the foundation of the Epiphany Truth and work. But as our Pastor's work was not that of gathering the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies as such, the truths that he gave on these subjects were not full enough for the work of gathering these as such. Their gathering as such is an Epiphany work, for which special Epiphany truths, not due to be seen in his day, are needed."

Once again, those struggling with the meaning of "as such" can get clarification from the above quote. Here, "such" is used to represent "the Great Company" and"the Youthful Worthies" so as to not reuse the same words a second time in the same sentence. It offers better grammar and simplifies the sentence. Clearly, both the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies are gathered as the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies in the Epiphany. The sentence loses its meaning if one of these classes is now gathered "as such" in the Parousia.

What five things, especially, constituted a call to the Youthful Worthies?

Answer to Bro. Johnson's study question from PT 1922, P.76 given in PT 1921, P. 54--"First let us see whom the men of Ephraim type. It will help us to understand this, if we keep in mind that the first battle of Gideon types the same thing as the first smiting of Jordan, the World's High Priest confessing the sins over Azazel's Goat, and the saints executing the judgement written. (Ps. 149:5-9) These works were completely and properly engaged in by the Very Elect only. Hence to have been called to the antitypical warfare in time to take part in them implies that one was called to the High Calling; 'for this honor have all His saints'; and to have been called to the antitypical warfare, but not in time to have taken part in it implies that one was not called to the High Calling, but to something else. The men of Ephraim, therefore, type certain ones called to take part in the warfare against antitypical Midian after the full number of the Very Elect has been won, and had been given that to do which was an exclusive privilege of the Very Elect. i.e., unto a completion and in the Lord's spirit to smite Jordan the first time, to execute the judgement written, to confess the sins over Azazel's Goat, and to engage in Antitypical Gideon's first battle. Whom then do they type? We answer: Very evidently the Youthful Worthies. How did Antitypical Gideon call them? We answer: (1) by continuing the invitation to consecrate after the fall of 1914; (2) by emphasizing after the Fall of 1914, e.g., in Z'15, 269, pars. 6, 7, the fact that there would be a class, who, called too late for the High Calling, would be privileged to share in reward and honor with the Ancient Worthies, i.e., that there would be a Youthful Worthy class; (3) by arousing them to battle against error; (4) by the teaching during 1916 that the Lord's people would smite Jordan twice; and (5) by encouraging repeatedly during 1916 the Lord's people along the lines of the privilege of smiting Jordan. These five things as well as others were a call to the Youthful Worthies to take part in the warfare against antitypical Midian, to take the waters of antitypical Jordan. As in the type the men of Ephraim were to take the Jordan waters as far as Beth-barah (house of the passage), so in the antitype the Youthful Worthies, who, as we have seen, being a part of Elisha (P'20, pars. 1, 2), were to smite the peoples, Jordan, on subjects on which the smiting had been especially done by the Lord's house (beth) who had had a passage (barah) across Jordan, i.e., they were to smite especially what the members of the Elijah class, those who had crossed Jordan, had previously smitten. In other words, they were to smite Jordan the second time."

Had the Youthful Worthies been a separate and distinct class in 1881, the above type and antitype would not work or make sense.

Our Seventeenth Annual Report (1935)

PT 1935, P. 174--"Turning our eyes to the Lord's people we see the indications of Epiphany conditions as to them fulfilling also. Broadly speaking there are two stages in the Epiphany for the Lord's people: (1) that of the priesthood's dealing with the Great Company as Azazel's Goat and as uncleansed Levites; and (2) that of the priesthood's leading the work of the cleansed Levites, the Youthful Worthies sharing with the priesthood or with the Great Company in these two things, dependent on their characters. Incidentally the Lord is calling the Youthful Worthies as a class. These works as due have been fulfilling."

Here, in this 1935 PT Annual Report, Epiphany conditions are briefly mentioned. The word "incidentally" means that the calling of the Youthful Worthies AS A CLASS is a point of fact of a subordinate nature to Epiphany events 1 and 2. Had they become a class in the Gospel Age Harvest (1881), they would not be secondary to these other events in the Epiphany.

Our Fifteenth Annual Report (1933)

PT 1933, P. 182--"Thus he was used by the Lord to supervise the foundation of the Epiphany work; and having completed this he was called to his glorious reward, since among other reasons, his continuance in the flesh would have prevented the complete untying of Azazel's Goat and the separation of the Little Flock and the Great Company, because during his stay here the involved revolution could not have taken place, nor would the Great Company in the Truth, all convinced that he was that Servant, have separated themselves from those who rallied to him. Hence it was expedient that he go beyond the vail in order to the further unfolding of the Lord's plan, since with the completion of the Little Flock the next thing in the unfolding of the plan would, of course, be the work toward the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies as classes."

More clear and accurate truth from Bro. Johnson in this early PT Annual Report. Here, in reference to events post Pastor Russell's time, he mentions both the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies in similar fashion. If one became a class in the Epiphany , then the other must as well.

One plus one plus one equals what?

"Question (1935)—How can we harmonize the fact that the fulness of the Gentiles came in probationarily passover 1878 and the fact that the general call ceased Oct., 1881?

Answer—By the fulness of the Gentiles coming in probationarily passover 1878 we understand that at that time those who had made their calling and election sure before that time, plus those under the call who had not yet made their calling and election sure, plus those who at that time came under the call totaled the entire 144,000. The small sifting involving disgruntled Adventists in 1875 and the large noransomism sifting beginning passover 1878 imply that a considerable number lost their crowns between 1874 and 1878, whose crowns were not only assigned to others, but enough of still other Gentiles came under that call during that period, Oct., 1874-April, 1878, as to fill up the predestinated number probationarily. We further understand that no crowns were lost after Passover 1878 until immediately before Oct., 1881, when special calls went out to fill up the lapsed crowns to bring them up again to the full 144,000. These considerations prove that all called up to those called from Oct., 1881, onward, were called under the general call, since before Oct., 1881, no special calls were issued. Hence, while the fulness of the Gentiles came in probationarily at the passover of 1878, the general call ceased in Oct., 1881. How do we know this? Because first in Oct., 1881, special calls were made to bring up again, for the first time after passover 1878, the called to 144,000. The harvest parallels prove that the general call ceased in 1881; for as the general call to Israel ceased in Oct., 36, proven by the fact that then the call went out to Gentiles to fill up the elect number which Israel failed to furnish, and thereafter Israel furnished only special ones for the call; so the Nominal Church, failing in 1881 to furnish the full number of the faithful called, the call went forth “to certain ones in the field,” the Nominal Church from then on furnishing only specially called ones. ’35-183".

Note that this Q&A was given only two years after the Ruth article. The only groups mentioned were those running for the Little Flock. No Youthful Worthies. No fourth group. No other call. No later correction to this Q&A.

Spirit Discernment—Does Bible Teach All Consecrated Have.

"Question (1957)—Do the Scriptures teach that all of God’s consecrated people have spiritual discernment?"

In the answer to the question, we have:
"During the Gospel Age, prior to 1881, while the General Call to Little Flockship was still open, all of the consecrated were Spirit-begotten; hence during that time only the Spirit-begotten could discern the deep things of the Truth as due."

In the next paragraph, it is explained:
"However, since the General Call ceased in 1881 (B 235; C 205-225), those consecrated ones for whom no crowns have been available, and who consequently have not been Spirit-begotten, may, nevertheless, like the Ancient Worthies did in their times, discern clearly, through the aid of the measure of the Holy Spirit they have, the deep things of the Truth as due (comp., e.g., E. Vol. 4, pp. 413, 414, 462, 463, 467-469; E. Vol. 15, pp. 652, 653)."

If all of the consecrated were Spirit-begotten up to 1881 and only they could discern the deep things of the Truth, how can there be these new Youthful Worthies from 1878-1881? And why could they not discern the deep things?

Youthful Worthies—How Can We Know Who They Are.

"Question (1921)—How can we know who is a Youthful Worthy?— Answer: First we will answer with reference to those brethren who have consecrated since the Fall of 1914. Knowing from many reasons that spiritbegetting ceased by the Fall of 1914, we readily can know of all who have consecrated since that time that they could not be spirit-begotten; and that, therefore, their hopes lie in the direction of Youthful Worthiship. With respect to those of them who consecrated since the general Call ceased in 1881 (F 156, 157), we cannot now be sure, though each individual by the various witnesses of the Spirit may be able to learn his position. It would not, however, at all surprise us, if there should arise a Youthful Worthies’ Movement, separating them from others. If this should prove true, it would doubtless then become clear as to the Youthful Worthiship of all the unbegotten consecrated. ’21-78"

Note that Bro. Johnson does not say anything about individuals from 1878...only from 1881. If you believe the "present view," then this quote does not make sense. For those who believe he had two views, please post an article where he explains why he changes his mind and when.

Order in the Court?

The following quotes come from Bro. Jolly’s answer to a question in 1963 about the unfolding of the Epiphany Court after 1914 and the Camp after 1954 beyond the expectations of Bro. Russell and Bro. Johnson. If you believe the “present view” of the Youthful Worthies as a separate and distinct class in 1881, then not only do these parallel statements not work, but it also means that none of these spirit-Begotten brethren had any idea that this class existed in the Court during the Parousia. In effect, the "present view" alters cleansed Parousia and Epiphany Truth.

“After 1914 arrived, and later the due time came, the Lord made clear (through Bro. Johnson) that there was not only one class—the Great Company—but three classes in the post-1914 Court, during the Epiphany in its narrow, 40-year sense, as follows: (1) the unconsecrated tentatively justified (including many of them who came in from 1914 onward), who would not be remanded from the Court until 1954 (instead of 1914, as Bro. Russell had expected), (2) the Great Company, remanded from the Holy, and (3) the non-Spirit-begotten consecrated—the Youthful Worthies—who never had been in the Holy.”

“As Bro. Russell allowed for only one class—the Great Company—in the Court after 1914, and that one a class remanded from the Holy to the Court, so Bro. Johnson similarly allowed for only one class—the quasi-elect—in the Epiphany Camp after 1954, and that a class consisting largely of those remanded from the Court to the Camp.”

“After 1954 arrived and the due time had come, the Lord made clear that there was not only one class—the loyal, unconsecrated quasi-elect—but three classes in the post-1954 Epiphany Camp, as follows: (1) the Gospel-Age nominal people of God; (2) the loyal unconsecrated quasi-elect, including the tentatively justified who were remanded from the Court, and also other tentatively justified as the Covenant-believing Jews who have come into the Epiphany Camp since then, and additionally including those among the tentatively justified who have become (3) the consecrated Epiphany Campers.”