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.”

Esther

Esther 2: 17: "And the king loved Esther above all the women, and she obtained grace and favour in his sight more than all the virgins; so that he set the royal crown upon her head, and made her queen instead of Vashti."

E10, p. 283: "We will now by the Lord’s help proceed to the study of Esther 2. The casting off of antitypical Vashti from special favor began April, 1878, and was completed by Oct., 1881, just as in the parallel Israel began to be cut off from special favor, April, 33 A.D., and was completely cut off from it, Oct., 36 A.D. While the Lord’s wrath against her subsided (wrath . . . appeased, v. 1), He always remembered against her what she had done, and what He had decreed against her (what . . . against her).”

E10, p. 284: "Here the Laodicean Messenger in his first member, Bro. Russell, is introduced (a certain Jew . . . Mordecai [humble, warrior], v. 5) as being among Truth people (Shushan the palace).". . . 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. It should here be remarked that Mordecai in the book of Esther represents both members of the Laodicean Messenger, his first member acting as the antitype of Mordecai up to and including v. 18;”

Is the above statement similar to the Ruth account, where they left Moab in 1878 as consecrated Tentative Faith Justified believers as Bro. Russell suggested in P6: The New Creation?

P6, page 124: "As the consecration of the Levites in the type was a measurable consecration to follow righteousness, but not a consecration to sacrifice, so this next step of sanctification which belongs to those who accept God's call to the Royal Priesthood was symbolized in the type by the consecration of Aaron and his sons in the priestly office—a consecration to sacrifice. It was symbolized by white linen robes representing righteousness, justification, and by the anointing oil and by the sacrificing, in which all the priests participated. Heb. 8: 3."

"In the Levitical types two consecrations are distinctly shown: (1) the general consecration of all the Levites; (2) a special consecration of the few Levites who were sacrificers or priests. The first represents the general consecration to holy living and obedience to God which all believers make, and which by God's grace, through Christ, accomplishes for them, tentatively, "justification of life" and peace with God. This is what all true believers understand and experience in this age. But, as the Apostle explains, "the end of the commandment is love out of a pure heart" (1 Tim. 1: 5); that is to say, God foresees that our compliance with our first consecration, our compliance with the terms of our justification during the present age will, in its end, lead us up to the second consecration as priests for sacrifice."

When did Pastor Russell first recognize the unbegotten consecrators? Ruth 2: 5.

E4, p. 377: "asking his superintending reaper as to Ruth's identity types our Lord's raising in that Servant's mind the question as to the identity of the antitypical stranger—the Youthful Worthies. This occurred from 1881 onward, as various Tower articles suggest. The superintending reaper's answer (v. 6) types that Servant's explanation, given from 1881 onward in Towers, etc., that more were consecrating than could have crowns, because there were less crowns available, and that such surplus consecrators therefore constituted a class by themselves—the unbegotten consecrated, whom, basing the thought on the Youthfuls of Joel 2: 28, we now call Youthful Worthies, in contrast with and in partial allusion to the Ancient Worthies."

E10, p. 285: "then for a while in this book first one and then the other acts as such antitype up to and including Esther 3: 5; thereafter the second member of the Laodicean Messenger acts exclusively as such antitype. As said above, at Mordecai’s first appearance (v. 5) and, in fact, in all his appearances up to and including v. 18, he types the Laodicean Messenger in Bro. Russell alone. Returning now to the antitype: After their begettal this Esther class, of course, became the Church probationarily. This begetting and becoming the probationary Church set in with its first members in 1881 and progressed as such up to 1914; and, of course, this class was beautiful in holiness (fair and beautiful [literally, of fair form and good appearance]), for we are to keep in mind that after she was crowned Esther represents the overcoming Church in the flesh after Sept. 16, 1914. The pertinent facts that will be brought out as we go on prove that after Sept. 16, 1914, the door of the high calling was closed to consecrators.

E10, p. 286: "among the Lord’s people (king’s house) under Bro. Russell’s charge, as the one who had charge of the household (custody of Hegai, keeper of the women). The spirit of this class pleased him (maiden pleased him, v. 9); and it effected favors to be given them from him (obtained kindness of him). He zealously gave them the corrective and ethical teachings of the Word as the means of their sanctification (speedily gave her . . . purification), as well as the doctrinal and refutative teachings needed by them (things as belonged to her [literally, her portion]) and all needed consecrated companions (seven maidens [crown-losers and Youthful Worthies]) that were proper for them to have (meet to be given her), from among the Lord’s people (out of the king’s house). He assigned these and their companions (her and her maids) to the best place among the consecrated (best place . . . women)."

"Their humility, as well as Bro. Russell’s teachings (Mordecai charged her, v. 10), prevented their claiming for themselves Little Flockship (not shewed her people), nor even Spirit-begettal (kindred), for as yet neither of these things were certain, hence could be held only as a matter of faith, not of knowledge, since from 1881 onward these things were not certain in individual cases, because all consecrators were not accepted into the high calling. All through the years (every day, v. 11) of the special calls, 1881-1914, Bro. Russell very zealously approached (walked . . . house) these faithful ones, to learn (know) of their prosperity (how Esther did) and of their experiences (what should become of [literally, what was done with] her). Before each consecrated one’s (maid’s, v. 12) time would come for each of his testings (turn was come to go in) by the Lord (king Ahasuerus), he had to undergo a sufficient preparation (after she had been twelve months), as was customary with the consecrated. In the type naturally the full preparation preceded any of the testings, but in the antitype the preparation and the testing are intermittent things, i.e.,

The Flood Year

E5, pages 62-64, paragraph 60: "the last of all the classes, the Youthful Worthies, entered the antitypical Ark in 1881."

If some brethren are using this reference to show that the Youthful Worthies became a class in 1881, rather than in 1914, then these questions should be answered:

1. Are they a Parousia Harvest class or an Epiphany class?
2. When did the Epiphany begin? 1914?
3. Can two calls be open at the same time? See: Eph. 4: 4.
4. If there are two calls, how is it determined who belongs to which class?
5. Did "That Wise and Faithful Servant" call them Youthful Worthies?
6. Was "That Wise and Faithful Servant" made ruler over all HIS goods?
7. Can this “present view” be harmonized with the Harvest parallels?

E5, page 73, paragraph 71: "This period of 56 days typed 602.26849312 years, which ended Oct., 1881. The last day of these antitypical 56 days began Jan., 1871. During this antitypical day our Lord returned, raised the sleeping Saints, cast off Babylon, ended the General Call, and began to develop the Youthful Worthies, who were from God's viewpoint anticipatorily in the antitypical Ark with all its other classes from the beginning of the antitypical Flood year."

Notice how Bro. Johnson orders this last flood-year day of over 10 years. He offers the events in sequential order and the last mentioned is the Youthful Worthies in 1881, not 1878.

1. Our Lord’s return (1874)
2. Raised the sleeping Saints (1878)
3. Cast off Babylon (1878)
4. Ended the General Call (1881)
5. And began to develop the Youthful Worthies (1881)

Conclusion
Were the consecrators, who were unbegotten from 1881 onward, individuals of a developing Epiphany class? Did they have a call from 1914 onward to become a developing Epiphany class with a 40 year call ending in 1954? Were the unbegotten consecrators from 1881-1914 similar to the Crown Losers of the Gospel Age, who manifested themselves as an Epiphany class in 1917?

2 Cor. 4:2 (see Expanded Biblical Comments): Let us not twist or wrestle with God's Word.

Ruth and Naomi, Type and Antitype 1844-1921

When studying the Book of Ruth, one should not start the examination at verses 16 and 17, continuing to verse 22. By using only these seven verses, the impact of the entire type and antitype is lost.

Verses 6 and 7 tell of their coming to a knowledge that the Truth was again advancing and becoming clear and abundant from (1874-1878). The famine was over in Bethlehem and now these three classes arose and left Moab in 1878. Naomi (Crown Losers), Orpah (less faithful tentatively faith justified), and Ruth (more faithful tentatively faith Justified) in verses 6 and 7 also tell of these three classes leaving Moab and journeying toward Judah.

E4, p. 371 shows these three classes leaving Moab in 1878 and advancing toward Israel. During the days of the Judges, when one left Moab going North, one entered into the land of Ruben. As one journeyed going around the Dead Sea heading west, one would cross the river Jordan entering into the Land of Judah.

There were tests that were placed on these two tentatively faith justified classes. These tests were of counting the cost of going on to the vows of consecration after having made the pledges of (tentative) faith justification.

Test #1: Ruth and Orpah were tested as they journeyed to see if they were willing to consecrate.

In the first test, the two tentatively faith justified classes are tested as to whether they would continue their journey toward consecration. Pages 371 – 372: “the easier way of settling down to a comfortable life in the nominal church, contrasted with antitypical Naomi's forbidding attitude, made her conduct tell them that they would find ease and agreeable associates in antitypical Moab (vs. 8, 9). Naomi's kissing of Orpah and Ruth types the crown-lost ones' love for the justified at the prospective parting. Orpah's and Ruth's weeping types the grief of the two involved antitypical classes at the thought of parting.” Notice, now, that the three classes are journeying toward Judah and eventually Bethlehem.

Test # 2 is placed upon the two tentatively faith justified classes.

Page 372, par. 3: “(3) The particular form that Naomi's faithfulness in opposition to the nominal church ways, teachings and practices assumed was her presentation of the Truth on the death state, eternal torment, the high calling, future probation and restitution in opposition to the views of 'the shepherds and the principals of the flock.' This aroused their outspoken opposition.”

Verses 9-12 shows their looking for Shepherd’s (Husbands, Spiritual leaders). No men to lead them, “Nor did the antitypical Naomi class have any associates who could act as its leaders (husband v. 12).” This shows the slow rate of progress without spiritual leaders.

Test #3 is placed upon Ruth.

Orpah has determined to return to Moab, since her gods were the creeds. So is Ruth willing to consecrate? This test is whether she (Ruth) is willing to give up their creeds. Page 373, par. 4: “(4) Ruth was the only object of Naomi's third attempt (v. 15). Antitypical Orpah's people were the Nominal people of God and their gods were the creeds. This furnishes us the clue as to what the third attempt of antitypical Naomi was. Their full repudiation of the creeds (gods, v. 15) and their determination to leave the Nominal Church had a temporary repelling effect on antitypical Ruth, because these believed the nominal church creeds were to be solemnly adhered to as divine oracles, and that the nominal church as God's mouthpiece, channel, should not be left by God's people.” . . . “Ruth overcame the third obstacle to her following Naomi, so the Ruth class overcame the obstacles to consecration.”

What do we see?

From these earlier verses we have learned that they, in their journey, had left Nominal Christendom as three classes. When Ruth consecrated, she was in the land of Judah and not in Bethlehem and was, as Bro. Johnson states, a stranger (E4, Page 374, 9 lines from top). Now, when did the Youthful Worthies become a consecrated stranger in the land? Ex. 12: 14 shows (in E8, pp. 619-620) from 1881 onward (not 1878) this consecrated stranger was instructed to keep the Passover according to all its ordinances. . .

E8, page 620: “he must keep it, i.e., during the Gospel-Age from 1881 onward as a part of Nisan 14, with the leaven of sin and error purged out, with the unleavened bread of sincerity and Truth and with the bitter herbs of trials, sufferings and persecutions, with the staff of God's Word in hand as his support, with the girdle of service about his loins and journeying out of symbolic Egypt to antitypical Canaan. When v. 14 tells us that there is one statute for the stranger and the Israelite born in the land, it gives us the thought that in the antitype there is no difference in what consecration requires of the new creatures and of the Youthful Worthies. They make the same vows of deadness to self and the world and aliveness to God. The difference is, therefore, not in the obligations that they take upon themselves, but in the use God makes of their consecration: the consecration of some is accepted by God through the begettal of the Spirit and that of the others is not. But the same antitypical Passover doctrines and practices both classes are to live out—one statute to the stranger and to the one born in the land. But as the Youthful Worthies now do these things, not as the parts of a trial for life, but of faith and loyalty, they will unto a completion do these things Millennially and in the Little Season as the parts of a trial for life.”

With this in mind it is easy to understand and harmonize Bro Johnson’s statement in E4, on pages 374-376 and particularity 375, where he says “brought back with them a faithful class of unbegotten consecrated ones from 1878 on.” For they consecrated during their journey and not while they resided in Moab; for they came out of their homeland as tentatively faith justified believers and consecrated later. (See Ruth 1: 6-7 and E4, p. 371.)

Couldn't join in any of their games!

These new Youthful Worthies (from 1878 to 1881) that the current Executive Trustee has created, according to Bro. Russell, Bro. Johnson and Bro. Jolly, were not allowed to participate in the same activities as their younger counterparts (from 1881 onward). They:

• Were not added to the reserve list to receive a crown when one became available. See E4, pp. 419-420.


• Could not keep the antitypical Passover. See E8, pp. 619-620.


• Did not see the deeper things of God. See E4, pp. 440, 462.


• Were not able to figuratively father others into the Truth. See current PT.


• Will not be associated with the Ancient Worthies. See F 156-157; PT 1971, p. 66.


• Had no mother, since Hannah did not represent them. See E 13, pp. 8, 20, 32.

Why were these Youthful Worthies not allowed to do these things? Were they being punished? No. It is only because they DID NOT exist! The Ruth picture plainly shows that there were some tentatively justified ones making their way towards full consecration, coming back with Naomi. They could not do these things until full consecration became available (E4, p. 469).

Manifested Destiny

E4, P. 39: “The manifestation of the Youthful Worthies is another proof that we are in the Epiphany. The Youthful Worthies could not have been manifested as a class until after Sept. 16, 1914.”

This is yet another clear reference that a few brethren blur in order to prop up the Executive Trustee’s “present view” of the Youthful Worthies. These brethren say that the Youthful Worthies already existed as a class, but were revealed (an accurate definition of the verb manifest) as a class after Sept. 16, 1914.

The problem is that they simply read it as a change of state, such as from invisible to visible. They fail to see the importance of the date in the sentence structure and how it affects the subject in the sentence! The date follows the modal perfect "could not have been" (modals are used to indicate degrees of certainty, and ability), which suggests that it was impossible for something to happen to the subject in the sentence before a certain time. This helps us understand that the date is critical for any possible activity and that a change must occur with the subject. So, what made it possible so that the Youthful Worthies COULD BE REVEALED AS A CLASS sometime AFTER that date? The last member of Christ’s Body was brought into the Body which allowed the Youthful Worthies TO EXIST AS A CLASS ON that date! And that is exactly what happened, since we all know it took time for them to be revealed once they existed.

The Great Company's Existence

Brother Johnson helps us out even more with the word “existence” when mentioning the Great Company in PT Sept. 1930, under the article “Our Lord's Second Advent Mission For His Own.” Here, he really spells it out:

• “What is ‘the day of His coming’? We answer, the Parousia Day; for that is the time, at its beginning, when His Second Advent set in. What is the period ‘when He makes manifest’ especially? We reply, the Epiphany Day; for that is the special time when, by the bright shining of the Truth, He makes persons, principles and things manifest.”


• “In view of the fact that the time of trouble and the Epiphany are identical, and in view of the fact that the Great Company as a class, as distinct from individual crown-losers living throughout the Age”…“first comes into existence and is developed in the time of trouble.”


• “at that time there was no Great Company as yet, the Great Company being an Epiphany development, though there were then individual unmanifested crown-losers.”


• “now it is proper to point out manifested crown-losers as such, since now is the time for the separation of the crown-losers and the crown-retainers, even as our Pastor told us that after antitypical Elisha would be manifested, separate and distinct from antitypical Elijah, it would be proper to point out such manifested individuals of antitypical Elisha as members of the Great Company.”

A Parallel Manifestation Example

The following is given the same year that Rutherford disputed the existence of these “Modern Worthies.” PT 1920, page 158:

• “The manifestation of the Youthful Worthies is another proof that we are in the Epiphany. The Youthful Worthies could not have been manifested as a class until after Oct. 1914 when the last member of Christ’s Body was brought into that Body.”

In the very next paragraph:

• “The Manifestation of ‘that evil servant’ is also another proof that we are in the Epiphany.” Of Rutherford he then says, “But his coming upon the stage of action as ‘that evil servant’ being due after ‘that Servant’s’ work was complete, his activity is one that belongs to the Epiphany; and his manifestation, therefore, proves that we are in the Epiphany.”

Brother Johnson explains clearly that Rutherford came into existence as “that evil servant” only after Bro. Russell had completed his service. It takes place in the Epiphany, shown in parallel with the existence of the Youthful Worthies as a class in the Epiphany.

The Epiphany Movement

"No New Creature is to be regarded by us, because he is not considered by God, a Great Company member until he has been manifested as such, since God has all along considered all New Creatures, regardless of whether they are crown retainers or crown losers, as priests until manifested as being no longer priests. This is evident from the fact that, in the Gospel Age picture of the tabernacle, there is no place where the Great Company is shadowed forth in the structure. It is only at the extreme end of the Age, i.e., in the Epiphany, that the picture becomes Epiphaniac, and as such the court represents the consecrated who are not priests, i.e., the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies--Epiphany Levites, while during this time the faith-justified who have been the Gospel-Age Levites are by the lapsing of their faith justification remanded, the true ones among them to the Epiphany camp, the untrue ones among them "without the camp."--PT June 1945, P. 96

And The Door Was Shut

WT JUNE, 1889 (R 1112-1113)—Many who have read DAWN VOL. II.-- "The Time is at Hand"--are anxiously inquiring whether they are too late for admittance to the kingdom class: whether the door of opportunity is yet open, or whether it closed when the high calling ceased, in 1881. We answer, Though the "call" has ceased, the "door" is not yet shut. The "call" and the "door" are distinct and separate.

The Scriptures teach that God fore-ordained or predestinated that a fixed, definite number should be selected from among men to constitute the Bride of Christ and be his joint-heir in the great work of bestowing the Millennial blessings upon the world in general. And this is perfectly reasonable.

To secure this number, "many are called" or invited to pass an examination in the school of Christ, to prove their worthiness to be of that select and limited number. Only believers in Christ, only such as recognize him as their Redeemer, are "called" or invited to stand this examination under the promise of that great prize of joint-heirship with Christ; and all such believers were invited, from the day of Pentecost down to the time when enough had been called to complete the fixed number, which God had fore-ordained. Then, of course, the call to that honor and distinction must cease; for God would certainly not mislead any one nor promise "the great salvation" to a single individual more than the predestinated number. None shall have it to say that God invited him to run the race for the prize of the high calling and that after running faithfully he could not receive the reward because too many had been called and the fore-ordained number was more than supplied.

First notice, that the close of the "call" is not the close of the race. Those who have been called, and who have accepted the conditions of the call and promised to "run" faithfully so as to obtain the prize, must be tested. And hence the fact that the general calling of new runners has ended, in no way ends the running of those who were called in time and who had consecrated themselves to the Lord's service before the call ceased.

And the fact that you may only recently have come to a clear knowledge of the exceeding great and precious promises of the things which God hath in reservation for them that love him, does not prove that you were not called and accepted as a runner for this great prize long before you understood clearly how great and grand the prize is to be. In fact, not one who accepts the "call" is able at first to comprehend fully either the roughness and narrowness of the way, or the grandeur of the prize to be attained at its farther end. The clearness of our comprehension of the promises comes to us as the power of God working in us to strengthen us and enable us to overcome present obstacles, difficulties and trials. The exceeding great and precious promises are unfolded to us gradually, as we prove faithful and go on, in order that by these--by the strength and courage which they infuse--we might be enabled to so run as to obtain the promised prize.--2 Pet. 1:4.

The class to receive the prize is not only called and chosen (accepted), but also faithful. And though the general "call" has ceased, it is evident that the testing of the faithfulness of the called ones is not yet finished. The faithful are being marked, sealed, and separated from those who are unfaithful to their covenant of self-sacrifice; the wise virgins are being separated from the foolish ones, whose folly consists in supposing that they can run for and win the world's prizes of honor, wealth, etc., and at the same time run faithfully the race for the great prize, of glory, honor and immortality,--the very conditions of which render such a course impossible.

When all the faithful "wise" virgins have been proved so, and have entered in to the joys of the Lord, the "door" of opportunity to become of that class will close, and no more will enter. When all the "wise" have entered in, the number predestinated will be complete; and then the Master will rise up and shut the door. (Luke 13: 24, 25; Matt. 25: 10.) Our Lord himself tells us that then many will begin to see matters differently--to see what privileges and opportunities for sacrifice they once enjoyed and missed. But when they shall seek and knock, the Master will tell them, I do not recognize you as my Bride--she is complete and I have but one. But thank God, other Scriptures show that the foolish virgins, though thus rejected from the high calling for which their conduct, when on trial, will have proved them unworthy, will nevertheless be granted a lesser favor and will be known in a humbler capacity in the Lord's household.

Before the door shuts, therefore, before the full number of the faithful is finished, let each strive to make his calling and selection sure; and to this end let us permit the Lord, by these precious promises and these explanatory and illustrative parables, to work in us to will and to do his good pleasure.

But some will say, I am certain that I am not one of those called before the general "call" ceased in 1881, because I then was not only wholly ignorant of the deep things of God's promises, but more, I was wholly a stranger to God, and even an enemy of his, far from any covenant with him to do him service, and far from any such desires. But recently I came to know God at all, recently I took Christ's yoke upon me to learn of him, and still more recently I learned of the privilege of suffering with Christ now, in self-denial in his service, and that such joint-sacrificers are by and by to be made joint-inheritors with him in the glorious work of the Millennium. And now, after seeing these glories, and after admiring those precious things, and after setting myself to run this race for this wonderful prize, must I conclude that it is not open to me, because enough to fill the number had already been called? I would not think to change the divine arrangement, or to ask that another be added, beyond the limit determined by divine wisdom, but I shall feel keenly my misfortune.

To such we answer (briefly here, more fully in DAWN Vol. III. now in preparation): Run on, dear brothers and sisters, your case is not so dark as it seems to you. Remember that if all who had accepted the call when it closed should prove faithful to their covenant, there would be none too many, but just enough. Remember, too, that your observation, as well as the Scriptures, indicates that of the "many" who accept the call "few" will be chosen, because but few prove faithful to their covenant when on trial. As one after another some of the "called" ones prove unfaithful, their places of labor and their crowns of reward are transferred to others. One of these places of labor and one of these crowns of reward may be transferred to you, and your name may be written on the scroll of life as a probationary member of the Bride of Christ, instead of one blotted out therefrom as unworthy.--See, Rev. 3:5; Heb. 12: 23.

It is already "the eleventh hour," the time for labor and sacrifice in the Lord's service is nearly ended, "the night cometh wherein no man can work," so if you see a "door" of opportunity, to labor for and serve the Lord and his truth, open before you, consider that the Master is saying to you, as in the parable, "Go ye also into my vineyard, and whatever is right I will give you." Remember that the reward is paid only to such as render service, and remember that while, as in the parable, the Lord does not promise the prize (the penny) as he did at the beginning, yet the parable shows that some thus admitted to the harvest work just at its close, just before the night when work will be impossible, will get the same reward as others--taking places and opportunities of labor left vacant by others.

And what a lesson is here for such as have covenanted with the Lord to serve him first and chiefly, and who are neglecting his work to strive with time and thought and means for the transient joys and prizes which the world offers. These the Lord urges saying, "Be thou faithful unto death and I will give thee a crown of life;" "He that overcometh [who conquers in himself the spirit of the world] the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father and before his holy servants." But, our Lord says also: "Hold fast that which thou hast, that no man take thy crown."--Rev. 2: 10; 3: 5, 11.

Bro. Johnson, PT January 1921, Page 7

"From various brethren we have received many questions on the Youthful Worthies. We are glad to note the interest of the Lord's people in this as well as in other Biblical subjects. Such an interest is timely, since at this time the Lord has been pleased to arrange for the development of the Youthful Worthies as a Class as well as of the Great Company as a Class. The Epiphany is certainly an important epoch in the Lord's Plan, among other reasons, because during this time He delivers the Church from the earth, and develops two classes of the Millennial Levites, the Great Company--the Millennial Merarites--and the Youthful Worthies--the Millennial Gershonites."

The above quote parallels the two as to their development as classes. Very clear. No confusion. Moving the development of one of them into the Parousia should require the Executive Trustee to move the other as well. Otherwise, this parallel does not work.

Individuals of a Class

E4, P. 318: “Before the General Call to the Divine nature and joint-heirship with Christ ceased in 1881, the persons that we call ‘Youthful Worthies’ did not exist as individuals of a class; but since that time they have been, and now are coming as such into existence, and are showing evidence of existence as such.”

Some brethren misread “individuals of a class” in the reference above, saying that it shows a class from 1881. But in the complex sentence, it actually shows the correct view of individuals from 1881 and a class later. “Individuals of a class” is used quite frequently in literature to talk about similar individuals (plural), not a class (singular). A good example of this is from the University of Notre Dame about dialectics: “Lastly, the universal may express what is found in one or many individuals of a class, or even perhaps in all of them, yet in such a way that it could be absent without the individuals' ceasing to be of the same nature.”

Looking at the above E4 reference, it is easy to prove that Bro. Johnson was referring to the individuals with the subject “persons” in the independent clause and the plural pronoun “they” in the dependent clause. Towards the end of the sentence, Bro. Johnson says that these individuals are now appearing as a class with the use of “as such.”

It makes sense when we play it out: “but since that time [1881] they [these individuals] have been [in existence], and now [in the Epiphany] are coming as such [a class] into existence, and are showing evidence of existence as such [a class].”

The First Californians

The root of the movement’s current confusion as to the beginning of the Youthful Worthies lies in a misunderstanding of that exact reference they overuse. Put plainly, the “present view” brought forth by the Executive Trustee two years ago is based upon a lack of understanding of English semantics and perspective on the three misunderstood references in E4, pages 375-376.

• “brought back with them a faithful class of unbegotten consecrated ones from 1878 on”
• “coming back into present Truth, and bringing unbegotten consecrated ones with them from 1878 to 1881”
• “Hence no crowns were available for the Ruth class consecrating and coming into the Truth between 1878 and 1881.”

Out of Context

Read on their own, one would tend to think that there were Youthful Worthies from 1878 to 1881. But read in context, the antitype of the first chapter of Ruth shows a journey to full consecration from 1878 to 1881, overcoming obstacles along the way. Both the Ruth and Orpah classes (those more and less faithful tentatively justified) left with Naomi, so they weren’t fully consecrated right away. The obstacles couldn’t take place in rapid succession, since that would make the consecration process too fast and easy (which we know it is not). And all three classes had to leave the Nominal Church, Moab, in order to miss what they had. And finally, in order for both Naomi to be with her people in Canaan and for Ruth to be a stranger member of Israel required that they be in the land…not along the way…and not in Moab.

When did you first meet your lovely wife?

The three references above show a process, coming from a perfected or known point of view. An easy example of this is in the question, “When did you first meet your lovely wife?” A smart husband, in recounting the event, would normally wax rhapsodic about the first time he met this lovely woman. Were they married then? Certainly not! But from our perspective it makes sense. We know her because she is his wife, he knows her as his wife, and the question acknowledges it. So, he references her from that status and knows what we mean. A dim-witted husband, in recounting the event, would take the question too literally and begin his story from the moment the minister pronounced them husband and wife. Clearly, the questioner was asking about their first encounter and not when they were actually married.

The First Californians

A better example, more in line with the E4 references, would be a similar journey. Quoted from California State University course material, “The first Californians were probably immigrants like the rest of us. Archaeologists believe that the ancestors of American Indians crossed over the Bering Strait from Asia thousands of years ago and then headed south. By 1769, about three hundred thousand Native Americans were living mostly near the coast….” The statement is shown from our perspective, since we know California. Hopefully, we would not be motivated to contact the California Historical Society to tell them we had found new truth about the state’s beginning and that it existed long before it was a state in 1850 or before it was a territory.

We All Have Choices

The autocratic attitude from the current Executive Trustee and the mob mentality from brethren who support him no longer allow for open, civil communication to prove truth and to seek to harmonize the scriptures. So let this posted information be a witness to Jehovah and to others that many attempts have been made to reach out to these dear brethren.

In E4, p. 291, regarding partisan support, Bro. Johnson states: “The Truth, its arrangements and its Spirit are by it neglected or antagonized whenever this is in the interests of the sect. Their actual, though not verbal motto is: ‘My party—I stand for it, right or wrong.’ Therefore they support their sect and leaders regardless of how wrong they are.”

The following questions have been asked, but never addressed by the Executive Trustee and certain Pilgrims associated with the LHMM.

1. How do you harmonize the “present view” of the Youthful Worthies with the writings?
   Do not the references by Bro. Russell, Bro. Johnson and Bro. Jolly show 1881 as individuals and 1914 as a class, not 1878 and 1881? As Berean Bible Students, can we harmonize the scriptures--two dates for one event? Does not E5 call this a cleansed truth as of 1954 and that we cannot change cleansed truth?
2. When are the Youthful Worthies a class?
   Are they an Epiphany Class as Bro. Johnson, Bro. Jolly, Bro. Gohlke and Bro. Hedman stated or are they a “Gospel Age Harvest Class” as has been recently stated from the platform?
3. Who do we serve?
   I hope God is the answer and not an organization. Also, calling some in the movement “Former Brethren”, do you now have Jehovah’s ability to determine who has lost their Justification?
4. At the 2007 Minneapolis Convention, you stated that Bro. Johnson disfellowshipped the Minnesota class when Sr. Norma was a child. Where is your proof?
   Why did Bro. Johnson send them Pilgrim service the following summer? Did this indeed happen or were you making this up to justify your attempt to disfellowship the Chicago ecclesia, your involvement in the Keystone Heights (FL), Springfield (MA), and Minneapolis ecclesia’s recent splits. According to the writings, aren’t these acts of clericalism? Would Bro. Johnson have meddled in local class business?
5. Where is the Biblical proof that you are the Spiritual Leader? Did not the Brethren at the 2004 FL convention vote unanimously with a show of hands to have you take over the duties of Executive Trustee? The paperwork handed out to everyone states nothing about you being the Spiritual leader.
6. How many times did the door to the High Calling close?
   This was asked at the 2008 Muskegon convention because of the direct comment you made: “The door shut 3 times. Slammed Shut!” It was stated from the platform that the question was deceitful. Why? Please tell us, according to the writings, when did the door to the “High Calling” close—1878, 1881 or 1914?
7. Does not 2 Cor. 2:14 show that from Pentecost to the General Call being closed (1881) that consecration and Spirit begettal were one in the same?
   Does having fully-consecrated non-spirit begotten ones from 1878-81 harmonize with this scripture and our writings? Is it your duty to harmonize these thoughts that contradict your “present view”?
8. Eph 4:4 – There was only one call during the Gospel Age. When did this call and completion to this call end?
   E5, page 502: “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,” These references are found over 100 times in the writings. Yet you say “not so.” You seem to ignore their content and existence.
9. What is the sifting error? Is it the defense of 1881 as individuals and 1914 as a class?
   You and your appointees are using names like “sifters and revolutionist” but are failing to identify the error (all distributed information is from the truth writings). In order to have sifters you need a sifting error. Instead, you have used slander and falsehoods. You have dismissed two faithful Brothers and ignored any who ask reasonable questions. You have denied the right hand of fellowship and mistreated faithful brethren. Bro. Russell, Bro. Johnson and Bro. Jolly would go into extensive detail to “prove all things” and to identify the error.
10. Why have you plagiarized the previous servant’s work by changing thoughts and adding dates without any notation that these were changed thoughts?

Hammering Away at the Same E4 References

For those who receive The Present Truth (PT) magazine, please read carefully the new Summer 2008 issue article titled “God’s Love for Outcasts”. Like other articles published in the PT, it is a modified, republished version of a previously issued article. The original is “God’s Great Love for Outcasts” from PT July-August 1982 by Editor Bro. Gohlke. While there are many changes throughout this new version, we take note of three that deal with the Youthful Worthies.

In the original article, no consideration is given to 1878 as to their beginning—only from 1881. Yet within the new article, all three changes point to the same references in E4, two now have the 1878 date, and one has the added bonus of a new parenthetical comment. Additions are shown in bold red and deletions indicated in bold green.

1. “In Lev. 19:9, 10; 23: 22 God charged the owners of harvest fields (representing our Lord—Matt. 20:1-8) to leave the gleanings for the poor (typing Great Company members, who lost the High Calling riches) and the stranger (typing Spirit-enlightened, non-Spirit-begotten consecrated ones, strangers to the High Calling, Youthful Worthies (E 4, pp. 375-376, pp. 443-445; P ’72, p. 39).”


2. “In the antitype, those post-1878, 1881 (F 156, 157) (P 6, pp. 156, 157; E 4 pp. 318, 376) and pre-Oct.-1954 consecrators who recognize that they are Spirit-enlightened, non-Spirit-begotten ones with Youthful Worthy hopes are not…”


3. The Youthful Worthies, the antitypical strangers, have in some cases from 1881 to 1914, (there were no Spirit-begettals between 1878 and 1881, thereby providing for Youthful Worthies to be developed; E4, p. 376; E11, p. 95) had the privilege of figuratively fathering—beginning the new life—in the spiritual elect and in some of their own class, and from 1914 to 1954 of doing the same in many more of their own class.

The excessive use of this newly added E4 reference to the existing article is a bit unsettling, since it shows the movement’s fervent attempt to focus readers towards their “present view.”

Should Another Date Be Changed?

More importantly, if there were Youthful Worthies fully consecrating between 1878 and 1881 as they believe, shouldn't they change the date for figuratively fathering other Youthful Worthies to 1878 as well (see change 3 above)? Because, if you believe their view, then it would also be possible for a fully-consecrated Youthful Worthy in 1878 to figuratively father another Youthful Worthy in 1878, 1879, 1880, and for part of 1881 (before the General Call ceased).

But this is not the case, since the Ruth picture simply shows those Tentatively Justified ones on their journey towards full consecration from 1878-1881. Full consecration for non-spirit begotten individuals was only available after the General Call ceased because it was limited to the Elect before that time. This is clearly shown at the end of E4, P. 469: “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.”

Inadvertently, their parenthetical comment actually supports the cleansed view. They wrote: “for Youthful Worthies to be developed,” which is actually true because these Tentatively Justified ones were developing towards full consecration…which could only happen in 1881.

Bro. Johnson’s writings MUST harmonize, especially if they’re coming from the same book.

Let’s Celebrate Summer

At the Florida convention in 2008, the following statement was made by the leader of the Question Meeting: “The earth has been righting itself rather suddenly and dramatically here in the last two years. When I check on that every once and awhile for my own curiosity, in the last two years the Earth has righted itself almost 2 ½ degrees. Quite a shift all of the sudden.”

According to a noted regional astronomer, here are the top three things that would happen if this were true:

1. The summer solstice in the Northern Hemisphere occurs June 20, 2008, when the Sun is in the zenith at the tropic of Cancer. It gives us our longest day and shortest night of the year. This date is important because it is determined by the tilt of the Earth’s axis. Any dramatic straightening of the tilt would cause the solstice to come sooner in the year and noticeably reduce the extra hours of sunlight we receive.


2. The orbit of the Moon is inclined by about 5° on the ecliptic, so it appears to wobble (moves higher and lower) in the sky. A change of 2 ½ degrees would alter that thereby affecting the moon’s tidal gravitational force. This, plus the heating index differences due to the solstice change, would cause catastrophic weather changes magnitudes greater than what we see today.


3. All astronomers would have to readjust their scopes that are based on calculations using today’s Epoch 2000 coordinate data. All deep-space bodies would be 2 ½ degrees off. In fact, all governments, companies and organizations using satellites or monitoring planetary spacecraft would notice the change. And there can be no conspiracy theory, since there are over 2.7 million registered amateur astronomers in the United States alone. The first community star party given after a shift would cause an uproar in the astronomy community.

The brother who made this statement should offer a correction.

Annual Report For French-Speaking Countries

"Dear Bro. Jolly: Motto text for 1974! I am writing this report after our French Home Gathering at Lens. The Polish, Belgian and Swiss gatherings are held respectively at Auchel, Dampremy-Charleroi and Vallorbe. Emphasis was put in the programs on the Parousia and the Epiphaneia (both from religious and secular viewpoints). The brethren were quite conscious of the exceptional solemnity of these Home Gatherings, marking the first centenary of Christ's Return and Thousand-year Reign, and emphasizing the gigantic works accomplished during that first century by our dear Savior and present King (including the Gospel Harvest reaping and the glorification of the Body of Christ, the manifestation—epiphanizing—of the Parousia of Christ to the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies as classes, the building of the Epiphany Camp, the Time of Trouble since 1914, the gradual overthrowing of Satan's empire and the general shaking of Great Babylon)."—Excerpt from Marcel Caron's report, PT January-February, 1975.

When did Jesus receive Spirit Begettal? At the river Jordan.

A Pilgrim in the movement had to correct yet another comment he made at their convention in May, stating that Jesus received Spirit begettal at his consecration. Certainly this brother studied and studied this topic, but perhaps he needs to study it some more. He quoted E15, page 54. Had he continued two more pages, it clearly shows that Jesus received Spirit begettal at the river Jordan. He should “Think about that!”

A correction to his correction needs to be made.

E15, Page 54: "Jesus evidently consecrated Himself before His water baptism; for the real baptism had to be begun before it could be symbolized, since we must have the original before He started out to be baptized by John.”

E15, Page 56: "Jesus, as we have seen, had three begettings: (1) as the Logos… (2) as the embryo Jesus… (3) as the New Creature Christ at Jordan…"

Could this be an incidental feature of the plan or another mistake? The next thing he'll be telling us is that the earth's tilt has shifted 2 1/2 degrees in the last 2 years.

The French Correction

One of the few proofs used by the movement in the United States to support its changed view (from the “two views” it initially brought forth) of the beginning of the Youthful Worthies as individuals and as a class is an interpreted/translated three-part discourse on the Book of Ruth given by Bro. Johnson, August 8, 1933 in Monceau-sur-Sambre near Charleroi, Belgium.

Specifically, they point to a small section within the first part of the document. Translated back to English and published in the Spring 2007 PT, it best reads: "… We can divide the Youthful Worthies in 3 groups: 1st : from 1878 to 1881; 2nd : from 1881 to 1914 when there were many more consecrated than crowns and 3rd : finally those who consecrated after 1914."

A closer look at the document and the use of the work itself as a proof bring up some important issues:

The author of the French-language document is UNKNOWN…though believed to be a Truth sister. And she interpreted/translated a discourse—something difficult to do accurately even without considering Bro. Johnson’s grasp of the English language. During this process, subtle use of words and meaning can be lost, changed, or infused with error. For instance, at the very beginning of the entire work, translated in English it reads, “The book of Ruth covers the period from 1844 to 1921. The 1st chapter relates to antitypical events which took place from 1844 to 1874, and the 2nd chapter refers to events that took place from 1874 to 1881.” These sentences incorrectly indicate the antitypical time periods for the 1st and 2nd chapters of Ruth as given by Bro. Johnson in the original article on Ruth (published three months earlier) and later included in E4, The Epiphany’s Elect. We know these to be 1844 to 1881 and 1881 to 1916 respectively. Additional mistakes appear in other parts of the document, but this example, which is from the very first paragraph, should suffice.

With regards to the initial quote, the French word “groupe” correctly translated “group” in English is never used by Bro. Johnson in any of his writings to describe the condition of the Youthful Worthies at different times. This usage is unique to the French document. Like Bro. Johnson in E4 and the June, 1933 PT, the document does use the French word “classe” to describe the classes which Naomi, Ruth, and Orpah represent. Why is this important? Because the French word “groupe” actually helps to emphasize status and one must therefore determine which three of the possible four are shown: pre-individual (those on their journey to full consecration in the Truth), individual (those who consecrated as strangers in the land), class (all who consecrated after 1914 when it was the only choice), and post class (after 1954 when no more were admitted). Clearly, the status of those after 1954 is not represented thus allowing us to recognize the other three.

What this shows is that only Brother Johnson’s actual, published work should be used to support his Epiphany truth. Certainly no fault can be attributed to the native French-speaking brethren, since few have sufficient command of the English language to appreciate the nuances of Bro. Johnson’s writings. Nor do they have every Truth resource available in French. E4, where this new truth was "discovered", is one such example. The lack of this Epiphany volume in their language makes it difficult for them to understand the changed view made by the movement in the United States, since they cannot easily see that Bro. Johnson would be contradicting himself within his own book.

The Antitypical Ark - Two Dates for One Event?

See PT 2006 Page 22.

“The emphasis put forth in the preceding writing is that the Youthful Worthies came forth as a class in 1881 not 1914”. (This thought or assumption doesn’t harmonize as Bro. Johnson explains, and nor does the erroneous view that two dates are correct as the assumption in this case indicates: 1881 not 1914 ) Reference E Vol. 5 Page 63 Par. 60.  We should also read page 74, 75 Par. 73 from E Vol. 5 and PT 1942 Page 62 to get the complete thought and clarification from Bro. Johnson. 

Please take note of the word “Anticipatorily” and its explanation. It means "as in the future".

Example: Question (1972)—When did Jesus become the Head of the world’s Mediator?

Answer.—At the time the angel announced the birth of Jesus, He was called “Christ, the Lord” (Luke2: 11). This was spoken anticipatorily (Rom. 4: 17), in view of the fact that the babe Jesus was the same one who in due time would be Christ.

Please take note on how the word "Classes" is used.

E. Vol 5 Page 74 Par 73

The last day of these antitypical 56 days began Jan., 1871. During this antitypical day our Lord returned, raised the sleeping Saints, cast off Babylon, ended the General Call, and began to develop the Youthful Worthies, who were from God's viewpoint anticipatorily in the antitypical Ark with all its other classes from the beginning of the antitypical Flood year.

Questions on page 95 – 96 E Vol 5

Please read these questions and compare them to the paragraph.

(73) What is the second question arising from the preceding discussion on the Flood year? What do the conditions before the Flood type? The Flood year? Of what was entering the Ark a type? What benefit in this connection did God give Abel, Enoch and Noah? By contrast how did He treat classes who came into existence long after the Covenant was made? On what Bible principle? On what other principle may the Youthful Worthies be said anticipatorily to have entered the Ark in 2045 B.C.? What does this do with our question?...

PT. 1942 Page 62 Col 1

            Question: Is it not self - contradictory to teach that the antitypical Flood year began 2045 B.C., and that persons, typical of classes which began to exist thousands of years later, entered the ark before the Flood began, while these classes entered the antitypical Ark long after the antitypical Flood year began?

            Answer: We are to remember that the antitype of the days before the Flood year (Luke 17:20, 27) consists of conditions in the world before and especially during the Parousia and Epiphany, while the Flood year represents the time during which the elect classes by consecration entered into covenant relations with God (1 Pet. 3:20 [ last clause ], 21). Entering the Ark was a part of the former picture. As God in the cases of Abel, Enoch, Noah, etc., anticipatorily gave them the benefits of the Abrahamic Covenant, i.e., treated them as being in that Covenant centuries before it was made, so He anticipatorily considered classes to be in the antitypical Ark – the Abrahamic Covenant – centuries before these classes came into being, on the principle that God “calleth those things that are not as though they were,” in view of His plan respecting them (Rom. 4: 17). This will harmonize the apparent discrepancy.