________________________________________________

Notes and Comments
on
"The Finished Mystery"

ADELAIDE
February 10th, 1919

________________________________________________

Foreword

These notes are sent out with sincere and earnest desire to assist the Lord's people in a matter which has caused so much anxious thought and discord. If you have read the work in question and concluded it to be all that it claims to be, then you no doubt believe its teachings to be harmonious and scriptural. If such is the case, nothing can overthrow it and the careful reading of these notes would simply prepare you to meet the objections which can be raised to it. 1f, however, the book can be shown to be inconsistent and unscriptural, and that it leads to the adoption of methods displeasing to the Lord, then as surely as you have submitted your will to the Lord, in consecration, to be guided by His Spirit and Word, you will be glad to have had these matters brought to your attention and to know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Notes on
"The Finished Mystery"

In response to the request of a considerable number of the friends in Queensland and New South Wales during my recent tour of those parts, I have consented to supply them with copies of my notes on "The Finished Mystery"—the so-called "7th Volume" of Pastor Russell's Studies in the Scriptures, and other matters related thereto. As these are rather too copious to permit of their being type-written as I had intended, I have decided to put them in printed form, and am taking the opportunity of adding a few further thoughts which may be helpful to some.

My thought in visiting the friends in the other States in connection with these matters, and publishing these notes, is that, recognising the Lord's people, wherever they may be, as being all members of the One Body, whether known or unknown to each other personally, we should each be as ready to serve those members who are unknown to us, as those with whom we are personally acquainted, if the Lord provides the opportunity.

The work under consideration, "The Finished Mystery," comes to us since Pastor Russell's death, purporting to be "new light," a further unfolding of the truth, and in his name.

Many of the Lord's people, because of the peculiar circumstances in which it has come out, and the claims which have been made for it, are experiencing a difficulty in determining whether it is "new light" or not. They recognise an altogether different spirit pervading it from that manifested in the six volumes of Bro. Russell's Studies, a spirit which they do not like, which does not appear to be the spirit of Christ, the spirit of love, and yet they cannot lay their finger on anything specially wrong in the teachings—the interpretations of the volume; and are consequently inclined, either to accept it for the sake of the good which they see in it, or else to let it go as a matter of no vital importance.

It is with a view to helping such as these, and to assisting them to recognise the true character of the volume, that I am presenting the thoughts herein.

I propose to deal briefly—1st, with the claim that this volume is Pastor Russell's 7th Vol. of Studies in the Scriptures; 2nd, with the subject matter of the volume itself, and 3rd, with the relationship of the Lord's people to The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, and the claim that it is the same channel which the Lord has been using throughout the Harvest Period for bringing the "Meat in due season" to His people.

In presenting these thoughts to you, I give them simply as my own views on the matter, leaving each one to weigh their value in his own mind with the help of the Lord, remembering that the responsibility for his decision rests with himself individually.

"THE FINISHED MYSTERY" A POSTHUMOUS WORK?

In dealing with the first point, I would point out that the volume has been sent out under false colors, untruthfully claiming to be a posthumous work of Pastor Russell, which, as a matter of fact, it is not in any sense of the word.

I believe there has been no intentional deceit in this, but the claim nevertheless is a false one, and we cannot think that the Lord would find it necessary to resort to a subterfuge to get out any fresh light that He might have for His people.

I believe the brethren who have written this book have been overborne by an undue appreciation of their own interpretations and eagerness to get them abroad, and thus have fallen a ready prey to the wiles of the great Adversary. Had the book come out in its own name, it would have had but an insignificant circulation; but with Pastor Russell's name attached as the Author, it was sure of an enormous circulation. Viewing the matter as they did, they have apparently argued themselves into the belief that the end justified the means used; and have endeavored to justify themselves in doing so by specious sophistries, which, however, have only to be looked fairly in the face for their fallacy, to be clearly seen.

The following is extracted from a Tract, entitled "The Fall of Babylon," which has been circulated broadcast largely with a view to advertising the volume:

(Page 3): "We give here a few extracts from the words of the prophet Ezekiel, and comments thereon taken from Pastor Russell's last message to the Church and to the world. We strongly urge that every Christian person, every orderloving man and woman, carefully read these prophetic statements and comments, as fully set forth in Vols. 4 and 7 of his Studies in the Scriptures elsewhere announced."

In both of these extracts it will be noticed that it is distinctly claimed, and sent forth to the world without any qualification whatever, that this so-called "7th Vol.", was written and left by Pastor Russell to be published as his message to the Church and the world; and distinctly declared that he left it as a legacy to the Christians of earth.

With reference to the word "Posthumous," I have examined a large number of dictionaries, some of them standard works, and these all concur in defining a posthumous work as being a work, the manuscripts of which were written by the alleged author, and published for the first time after his death.

Now all of Pastor Russell's writings appearing in this book were published before his death. It is therefore not correct to call it, in any sense of the word, a "posthumous" work of Pastor Russell.

That this is not a posthumous work of Pastor Russell is shown in the "explanatory note" to the volume, where it is stated that "it includes extracts from the Pastor's pen, all of which are referred back to his works."

That Pastor Russell did not write this book is further shown by the statements on page 6, where we are told that Bro. Fisher "made a careful and prayerful study of the book of Ezekiel," and as a result of this he and not Pastor Russell wrote the Commentary on Ezekiel. Also that "Bro. Woodworth with the key which Bro. Russell . . . had placed in his hands . . . has been enabled to bring together everything that Bro. Russell wrote on Revelation, and to explain and harmonise the other parts of that book with the Divine Plan; also to treat similarly the Song of Solomon."

Thus the Commentary on Revelation and the Song of Solomon is shown to have been written by Bro. Woodworth with the aid of what Bro. Russell had written.

In this connection it might be mentioned that the Commentary on the Song of Solomon was written by Bro. Woodworth and placed in Bro. Russell's hands several years before the latter's death.

Bro. Russell had it put away in his desk, and after his death Bro. Woodworth asked for the MSS. of it to be returned to him, and afterwards incorporated it in the so-called "7th Vol," and had it published as a part of Pastor Russell's alleged "legacy to the Christians of earth."!

That these Commentaries on Ezekiel and Revelation were written by them, and not by Pastor Russell, is shown further on page 63 of the Vol., where we are told that "while both residing in the same city, they have worked separate and apart from each other, not even comparing notes. The reader will be able to judge how fully the work of each harmonizes with that of the other, and with the Divine Plan, thus giving further evidence of the Lord's direction in the matter."

If these were the work of Pastor Russell why call attention to the alleged harmony between the two, since it would, in that case simply be a matter of arranging and publishing his MSS. And in such an event we would naturally expect them to harmonise as being the work of the one individual. The above statement shows, however, that the commentaries were the work of two separate individuals, and neither of them the one who is alleged to be their author.

Further: On page 154 we are told that the angel of Rev. 8:13 was "One of Pastor Russell's humble followers" who "apprehended correctly the significance of the three woes" (interpreted by him to be, "Methodism," "The Evangelical Alliance," and "The Seven Volumes of Scripture Studies"); and we are told on page 160 that it was the discovery of Methodism as the first woe (i.e., by this "humble follower" of Pastor Russell, not by Pastor Russell himself) that led to an identification of the four movements of the Reformation, which preceded it.

Thus we have Bro. Woodworth's distinct statement that none of these interpretations of Chapters 8 and 9 of Revelation (which are those which deal with the subjects thus interpreted) are Pastors Russell's, but another's (presumably his own).

The volume again is claimed to be a posthumous work of Pastor Russell, because interpreted "with the key" which Pastor Russell had placed in Bro. Woodworth's hands.

If this principle were admissible, then on the same grounds, any book written by any person after Bro. Russell's death, along the lines of Present Truth, might with equal justice claim to be his posthumous work, since we have all received what knowledge of Present Truth we possess through him and would therefore, in the same sense, be using the "key" he had placed in our hands. The claim, however, only needs thus to be carried out to its logical conclusion for its fallacy to be manifest.

But supposing for a moment that this might give it such a claim, the question then arises: Have Pastor Russell's interpretations been followed?

To this we reply that in many cases they have not. On the contrary, entirely contradictory ones are frequently given. Hence, even on this ground, the claim cannot be supported.

We are told again, that it is Pastor Russell's, because it is chiefly a compilation of things which he wrote. This statement, however, is not true, FOR LESS THAN A QUARTER OF THE WHOLE IS FROM PASTOR RUSSELL'S PEN; and many of these quotations from him are taken out of their setting and misapplied.

THE REAL AUTHORS OF THE BOOK

Once more, how can it be claimed that it is Pastor Russell's posthumous work, when, according to a reliable report of the trial, the book was skeletoned in 1906-7, which report is confirmed by Bro. Rutherford's statement that on assuming control of the Society at Pastor Russell's death, it was brought to his notice that Brothers Woodworth and Fisher had good interpretations of Ezekiel and Revelation.

In the "Watch Tower" of Jan. 1, 1918, page 6, we read:

"One of two things is absolutely certain; that this is the long-promised 7th Vol. with which the smiting is to be done, or else there must be another one written; and since this one contains all Bro. Russell has written upon the subject, it would seem unreasonable to conclude that another is to be written, since the Scriptures do not identify another messenger having authority to write."

If this latter statement is true, that "the Scriptures do not identify another messenger having authority to write," which the "Watch Tower" asserts, and which I have no doubt we will all agree with, since we recognise Pastor Russell as the Seventh and last messenger to the Church—why have Bros. Woodworth and Fisher taken upon themselves to write over and above what he wrote?

It is claimed that Bros. Woodworth and Fisher prepared the volume under the direction of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society.

This, however, is contrary to the facts. Bro. Rutherford (on his own confession at his recent trial), while not an officer of the Society, obtained control immediately on Bro. Russell's death, and within a few weeks of this event, and before he was elected President, gave direction for the preparation of the volume. It was not submitted either to the Directors of the Society or to the Editorial Committee. The first issue was paid for with funds outside those of the Society; it was copyrighted by Bro. Rutherford in the name of the People's Pulpit Association without the knowledge of the Directors of either Society, and it was not approved by the Watch Tower Society till after Bro. Rutherford had ousted a majority of the Directors on a supposed legal technicality and replaced them with nominees of his own.

In view of all these facts, can any unbiased mind reason that it can truthfully be called Pastor Russell's work?

It seems right that we should face the plain facts, and not permit ourselves to juggle with the truth, even to support a preconceived idea. As the Apostle says, "No lie is of the truth."

If, then, this volume is sent forth under such false colors, how can we expect the Lord's blessing upon it, or regard it as of the Lord?

With so much that may be said against it, which is manifest on the surface, it seems right and desirable in the interest of the Lord's people to note the fact that some of the previous experiences of Bro. Woodworth—the prime author of the book—are not such as to inspire confidence in him as the Lord's mouthpiece. We understand that since coming into the Truth he became affected of the evil spirits. In 1908, when Bro. Russell brought forward "The Vow," which was the cause of much controversy at the time, Bro. Woodworth was violently opposed to it, and regarded it as an indication of a desire on Bro. Russell's part to lord it over the Church. He permitted himself to be so worked on by his feeling in the matter that for a short time he was brought under the influence of the evil spirits; and even after recovering from this, his mind continued for about two years in an unbalanced condition on the subject; all this being the result (as he himself tells us) of too much confidence in himself and his own judgment.

It was during this time that he contemplated going to the Bible House to take Bro. Russell's place, alleging that the latter had proved himself unfaithful to his trust.

Finally, by the Lord's grace, he saw that he was all wrong, and in the Convention Report for 1914, page 274, he gives a touching confession of his condition, and his thankfulness that the Lord had opened his eyes, and restored him to favor.

But while we are glad of the Brother's restoration at that time, and we believe that he was fully forgiven by the Lord, yet we are to remember that our natural fleshly disposition still remains with us, even though our shortcomings, due to weakness of the flesh, are covered by the Lord's Robe of Righteousness and at any time we are liable to give way along these lines unless constantly watchful to keep the natural disposition under. ` '

Bro. Woodworth is highly imaginative, and possessed naturally of an undue appreciation of himself and his own judgment. Having already been under spiritualistic influences, and having a Seventh Volume already outlined, it would appear that he permitted his appreciation of his own interpretations to get the upper hand, and was in consequence, just the kind of man for the Adversary's purpose at the present time. A strong strain of egotism runs through the book, very far from the humility we should expect in one the Lord would choose for giving any further message to His people. There are traces of spiritualism here and there throughout the book, and in one place the writer confesses that only one who has been through the experience could describe, as he does, the influence of the evil spirits on the mind.

In view of this, there is evident need for the Lord's people to be doubly careful in accepting anything of this nature coming from such a source.

It is not surprising that Bro. Rutherford accepted the book. A man of good spirit, but naturally of an aggressive disposition, fond of debate and argument, and imbued with the thought that there was a "smiting" work to be done; when he read the MSS., with their slashing, caustic remarks, showing up the weaknesses of the nominal systems, and those connected with them, he probably thought "this is just the thing; this will down the systems." This thought and spirit no doubt caused him to overlook the necessity for a critical examination of the book; and his fear that it would not come out in time to do the work expected of it, caused him to withhold it from criticism by the Directors of the Society, and the Editorial Committee, which it should have had, and, on his own responsibility, he published it as a production of the W.T. Society which, as a matter of fact, it was not.

INTERNAL EVIDENCE THAT IT IS NOT OF THE LORD

While the considerations already presented are sufficient, to my mind, to show that this volume cannot be of the Lord—though permitted by Him, without doubt, for wise reasons—an examination of its contents confirms this belief. Its inconsistencies and misinterpretations are numerous, while the foolishness and irrelevancy of many of its so-called interpretations are such as, at times, to verge almost on the blasphemous.

Take for instance page 286, Rev. 18:19, where the Revelator uses a common Oriental figure to express the distress and lamentation which will be caused by the final destruction of the Babylonian Systems among those of the earth who have profited by their connection with them, saying, "And they cast dust on their heads." In this volume we are told, however, that the Lord meant by this that "they will do a certain amount of mudslinging," i.e., indulge in recrimination, vituperation, evil-speaking, which is quite a different thought, not in any way suggested by the figure.

Again, on page 165, Rev. 9:18—A quotation from an oldtime treatise on the growth of the hair, is given in explanation of this verse, to show that those who founded the various Protestant denominations must all have been baldheaded men, and that in consequence of this, the doctrines they taught were a mass of confusion.

We should note in this connection, that those interpretations are given as being those intended by the Lord. If this one is seriously meant, then it can only be described as extremely foolish. If it is only intended as a joke, then it is not only blasphemous, but a lie, for the writer sets it forth as the divinely intended interpretation, knowing all the while that it is not so.

The Watch Tower (January 1, 1918, page 6) says:

"If the Seventh Volume is the Sword of the Truth, put in such a way as to do the judging, and if the Elijah class is to do it, then it follows that everyone who fails or refuses to grasp this Sword and go forth in obedience to the Lord's direction, repudiates the provision made for him, and could not be designated of the Elijah class."

And then the question is asked:

"Is it true that the Seventh Volume gives an explanation of Revelation and Ezekiel in harmony with the truth revealed by the Lord to the church through His Messenger of the Laodicean period?"

To this I reply emphatically—No! it is not true.

On the contrary the explanations given are frequently contradictory of the explanations given by Pastor Russell.

Remembering that this volume is supposed to be written with the aid of the "Key," which Pastor Russell supplied, note the following inconsistencies:—

Page 295, Rev. 19:17.—Here the "fowls which fly in the midst of heaven" are called upon to eat the flesh of kings and captains, and mighty men, etc, etc.

These fowls are interpreted by Pastor Russell to refer to the "Vultures of Society, Communists, Anarchists, Nihilists, etc." carrying out the work of destruction in Christendom—Babylon. (See Bible comments).

Vol. 7, however, says that these represent "Saints," "the little flock," and "those living on a mental plane above the grossly material," devouring (or, assimilating) Bro. Woodworth's 27 interpretations!

Again, Pastor Russell says that the "Voice" of Rev. 18:4 calling on the Lord's people to come out of Babylon, is apparently "Present Truth," which has been going abroad since 1881, when "Food for thinking Christians" was distributed far and wide.

"Vol. 7," says that this "Voice" represents the W.T.B. & T. Society, which, however, was not incorporated till 1884.

Again, Pastor Russell says that the "seven angels" of Rev. 15:1 represent the "feet-members of the Church, representative of the entire body." (Z. 83-6).

"Vol. 7," on the contrary, says that they represent the "Seven Volumes of Studies in the Scriptures."

These thoughts about the volumes being represented by the plagues came out about 1902, but Pastor Russell never endorsed them, nor repudiated his interpretation of 1883, as he said he would in the "Watch Tower," if he altered his mind. In "What Pastor Russell Said," page 313, Bro. Russell says, in answer to a question:—

"On most doctrinal questions I prefer not to say either at Conventions or in private letters, anything else than what is in the 'Watch Tower,' because I find that some of the dear friends are inclined to say: 'Oh, well, that is what Bro. Russell used to believe; that is what is in the Studies and the Watch Tower I know; but since then he has changed his mind; he wrote me a special letter,' or 'I heard him say at the Convention this year, so and so.' I want to say that when Bro. Russell changes his mind he is going to put it in the `Watch Tower'; he wants you all to know; you must take it from the 'Watch Tower,' I will make it as plain as possible there."

Again—Regarding the "3 woes" of Rev., Pastor Russell says these correspond to the first three plagues on Egypt, and affect all in Christendom, the Lord's people included, and that the 7 last plagues of Rev. correspond to the 7 last plagues on Egypt. (See Z. 07, 15).

"Vol. 7" says, however, that the 3rd woe of Rev. represents the 7 Volumes of Studies in the Scriptures which are the 7 last plagues on Christendom. (See page 231).

It will readily be seen, that if the "3rd Woe" corresponds with the third plague on Egypt, then it cannot also represent the seven last plagues on Egypt.

Again—Pastor Russell says that the "Winepress" of Rev. 14:19 represents "the last features of the Great Time of Trouble;" and is to be trodden alone by the Lord Jesus. (See Bible comments).

"Vol. 7" declares that this "Winepress" represents Vol. 7, (i.e.—itself), and that it was "trodden" by Bros. Woodworth and Fisher at Scranton. (See pages 229, 230).

Again—Pastor Russell says, referring to our Lord's temptation by Satan:—"For a period of 40 days and nights His intense earnestness made Him oblivious to almost everything else. Apparently, He neither ate nor drank until the 40 days were ended. Then He was hungry, and at the moment of His physical weakness as the result of fasting; at the moment when He was overwhelmed with the realisation of the importance of the great contract He had entered into, and of what it would cost Him to fulfil its terms, Satan appeared as a tempter. (Z. 04-7; Z. 17-381).

"Vol. 7" says, on the contrary (page 127), "Truly we know the Lord Jesus at His first advent, began His ministry with 40 days of conflict with the adversary, who all that time sought to sway His mind."

The above instances might be multiplied manifold, but these will suffice to show that the book has not been written "with the key which Pastor Russell has supplied," and, therefore, even in that sense, is not his production. There are many misapplications of Pastor Russell's writings in the volume. For lack of time and space, I will just refer to one as a sample.

In Rev. 8:1, the Revelator states that at the opening of The Seventh Seal "there was silence in heaven about the space of half-an-hour."

"Vol. 7" (page 143) interprets this "half-hour" to mean one week, and that silence prevailing for half-an-hour represents that the nominal systems for one week would maintain silence regarding their doctrines, after the seventh seal is opened, at the end of which time—the full number of the body of Christ being complete—they would begin an unprecedented persecution of the Church, and in support of the idea that this passage applies to the clergy, quotes a comment by Pastor Russell on Jer. 8:14, with which it has no connection, and applies it to this passage.

The foolishness of this interpretation will be apparent. The clergy are to say nothing about their doctrines for one week after the Church is complete, and then to start persecuting them on an unprecedented scale.

The body of Christ is supposed to have been completed before last memorial, (March 1918) but no such persecution has begun yet.

Note also the inconsistency:— Here a half-hour is taken to represent one week, whereas, on page 269, one hour, is taken to represent one year.

The interpretation is manifestly purely arbitrary. Many other misapplications of the Pastor's writings occur throughout the books such, for example, as those in connection with Ezek 16. These, however, will be readily noticed by anyone examining the various passages critically. The above will suggest the need for a critical examination. Many of the interpretations, if followed out carefully and consistently, carrying them to their logical conclusion, are exceedingly foolish. Take for instance page 227, Rev. 14:19. There "the sickle" is supposed to represent the "7th Vol." The "Winepress" also is said to represent the "7th Vol." and the "treading" of the "Winepress" is said to represent the writing of the "7th Vol." outside of "Bethel," viz., at Scranton.

Now, since the treading of the Winepress must follow the casting into it of the fruit which is to be trodden, if we follow out the symbols as thus interpreted, it gives us the following remarkable result:—

The "7th Vol." (the Sickle) was distributed far and wide, and gathered all the sects (vine of the earth) in virulent opposition to the message of the truth, and cast them into the "Winepress" (also the "7th Vol."), and the "Winepress" (the "7th Vol.") was trodden without the city (i.e. was written outside "Bethel," at Scranton, after it had been published and distributed, and had done its supposed work).

The foolishness of this will be apparent, and yet this is sent out as a correct and Divinely-intended interpretation of this passage.

Note again, page 236, Rev. 15:6:—Here the "Seven Angels" bearing the seven plagues came out of the Temple "clothed in white linen, and having their breasts girded with golden girdles."

"Vol. 7" interprets these "Seven Angels" as representing 7 Vols. of Scripture Studies; and the "White linen" with which they were clothed as representing the Lord's Robe of Righteousness.

Now, how can a book or a series of books, however pure their teachings, be said to be clad in Christ's Robe of Righteousness—i.e., have Christ's merit imputed to them, for that is what this expression invariably means? This expression is never applied in Scripture to anything or anybody, except the Saints—the members of the Body of Christ.

In a later edition, an additional, and even more foolish explanation is given, viz., that the angels being "clothed in white linen" means that these "Scripture Studies" are "printed upon white paper," and that their being "girded with golden girdles" represents that "the front covers" of the books are "stamped with gold."

The curious fact about this is that the word translated "linen" means literally "flax," and not "paper" at all. One is tempted to ask why the Revelator particularly specified white paper. Would the message not be equally pure if colored paper had been used? And is the message in any way affected when the "Studies" are printed in Karatol form without any gold lettering on the covers? or are they and the magazine editions not referred to by the Revelator?

INCONSISTENCIES AND MISINTERPRETATIONS

The inconsistencies and misinterpretations in the volume are numerous.

For instance, in connection with the prophecy of Ezek 23. Here two lewd women, sisters, are referred to, named Aholah and Aholibah, the latter being represented as viler and more corrupt than her sister Aholah.

On page 475 of "Vol. 7" we are told that Aholah represents Roman Catholicism, and Aholibah represents Protestantism; Protestantism thus being represented as being more abominable and corrupt than Roman Catholicism. Anyone with a fair knowledge of history can see that this entirely misrepresents the case. Protestantism with all its evils (and they are bad enough) has never approached the Roman Catholic Church in corruption and abominations: and this opinion is expressed by Pastor Russell in Vol. 3, page 154, where he says, "Other Ecclesiastical systems, not so great as the "Mother" [R. C.], nor yet so wicked, sprang up out of her, through various attempted, though imperfect reforms." Moreover, "Vol. 7" is not consistent with itself, for on page 556 it states that Protestantism is "smaller and less corrupt" than Roman Catholicism.

Again— The "7th Vol." represents itself as being both the "mantle" of Elijah and the "fiery chariot;" which separated Elijah and Elisha. If the vol. represents the "chariot," then the work' represented by the smiting of Jordan by Elijah with his mantle, must have been finished before the volume made its appearance.

Again—On page 530, referring to Ezekiel's dumbness as portrayed in the prophecy of Ezek. 33, Nebuchadnezzar, with his armies, attacked and captured Jerusalem. A man escaped from Jerusalem and brought the tidings of its capture to Ezekiel, whom he reached a year, five months and twenty-six days after the event.

During all this time Ezekiel, in accordance with the Lord's prediction, remained dumb. The evening before the morning on which the messenger arrived with the news, Ezekiel's speech returned to him, and he was no longer dumb.

"Vol. 7" states that Ezekiel here represents Pastor Russell; that his becoming dumb represents Pastor Russell becoming "dumb" in death on October 31, 1916; that Ezekiel's remaining dumb for a year five months and twenty-six days represents that Pastor Russell would remain "dumb" in death for the same period in the sense that no new message would come from him till the end of that period, which would expire on April 27th, 1918, when a fresh message might be expected from him.

As Ezekiel received his speech again half a day before the messenger arrived, we are told that this represents that Pastor Russell would begin to speak again in the "7th Vol." "half a day" before the "year, five months and twenty-six days" should end (April 27th 1918.) But, while taking the year five months and twenty-six days as literal time, the author of the volume takes the half day, above referred to, and calls it symbolic time, making it thus represent six months, and then subtracts this 6 months, symbolic time, from the year five months and twenty-six days literal time, and tells us that this indicates that Pastor Russell would begin to speak again through the "7th Vol." six months prior to April 27, 1918, viz., in October, 1917.

The fallacy of such reasoning should be apparent even to a school boy. If the year five months and twenty-six days is taken as representing literal time, then the half-day taken out of it should also be treated as literal time; so that if it were a type of Pastor Russell at all he should not have begun to "speak" or send forth any "new message" till the evening of April 26th, 1918, i.e., half a day before the whole period expired. But if the half day is treated as symbolic, then the whole period also should be treated as symbolic, and in that case it would represent 536 years, less six months, leaving 535 1/2 years, which, of course, would mean nothing so far as typifying Pastor Russell is concerned. Although this mistake is so evident, yet, strange to say, the "Watch Tower" of December 15, 1917 (page 379), declares that this prophecy was fulfilled in the "large numbers" of "The Finished Mystery," which were disposed of during October, 1917, when, they say, Pastor Russell began "to speak again." And they hold up this egregious mistake as a Divine indication of the correctness of the interpretations of the volume.

I might add, before passing from this point, that if this incident of Ezekiel's dumbness were a type at all as suggested, then Christendom should have been "smitten" with revolution at the time that Pastor Russell died (about October 31, 1916), and not when he should begin "to speak" again, seeing that it was at the time Ezekiel became dumb that Jerusalem was smitten, and not when he began to speak again. Again, if Pastor Russell began "to speak" again in "Vol. 7," then he began "to speak" in July, 1917, when it was published, and not in the following October. Thus, this supposed fulfilment of the prophecy falls to the ground.

Again—On Page 182, Rev. 11:19, we are told that the "Ark of the Testament," referred to in this passage, represents "the repository" of the sacred and hidden things of Ezekiel and Revelation," viz., "The Finished Mystery."

This is an entirely unsupported and arbitrary interpretation, and does not at all accord with the significance of the "Ark of the Testament" (or "Testimony" or "Covenant") when referred to in other Scriptures. As Bro. Russell points out in "Tabernacle Shadows," page 121, and in many of his other writings, "The Ark represents "The Christ" complete—the embodiment of the Divine Plan.

Again—page 144, Rev. 8:3—"Another angel," referred to in this verse, is said to represent "The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society." What ground we would ask, is there for taking this to be the Watch Tower Society?

This Angel's work was done (casting the censer into the earth) before the Seven Angels (which are supposed to feature the Reformation movement) began to sound.

Moreover, the priests alone had the right to enter the "Holy" and use the censer, how then can a business corporation be represented by this?

Again—Page 145, Rev. 8:5.—The Revelator says that the casting of the fire from the censer into the earth was followed by "thunderings and voices," etc.

The "7th Vol." tells us "the Censer" represents itself ("Vol. 7"); that the "thunderings" represent the "7 Vols." of "Scripture Studies," and that the "Voices" likewise represent the "7 Vols." of "Scripture Studies." If, then, the "Censer" represents the "7th Vol.," as alleged, and the "thunderings and voices" represent the "7 Vols.," it follows that the issue of the "7th Vol." caused all the volumes to go abroad throughout the "Harvest" period, reductio ad absurdum.

HISTORICAL AND SYMBOLICAL INHARMONY

Again—Page 148, Rev. 8:8—This passage reads: "And the Second Angel sounded; and as it were a great mountain burning with fire, was cast into the sea."

This "burning mountain" is said to represent "England in the time of Henry VIII."; and its being "cast into the sea," to represent England being separated from the Papacy "no longer placed under religious restraint to it." This is an altogether unwarrantable use of the word "sea," although it certainly does credit to the ingenuity of the author.

It is using the expression in an altogether different sense from that given to it in any other part of the volume, where it is always taken in its true sense as representing the irreligious, turbulent anarchistic masses of mankind. Compare pages 126, 238, 488, 489, 490, 492, 562; also Vol. 4, page 638. Compare also Vol. I, page 318, where Bro. Russell says:—

"Throughout the Scriptures, 'sea,' when used symbolically represents the restless, turbulent dissatisfied masses of the world."

Now we would ask, Did the Church of England and its clergy constitute the irreligious masses of the country—the anarchistic masses? Surely not. The separation from Papacy meant simply the transference of the Church in England from one head (the Pope) to another head (the Sovereign of England) and England, in no sense of the word, was in a condition represented by the "sea." This is a strained interpretation introduced to fit the theory in the writer's mind.

Again—On Page 144, we are told that the "Seven Trumpets" given to the "Seven Angels" to sound, were "bugles, with which to blow bugle blasts of liberty from the oppressions of the Papacy"; and yet, on page 160, we are told that the sixth angel sounding his trumpet represented the beginning of the Evangelical-Alliance-Spiritism movement."

What "liberty" we would ask was represented in the formation of the Evangelical Alliance? Was it not, on the contrary, the very reverse. And, further, if the "fifth angel" sounding represented the beginning of the Wesleyan movement (page 155); and, as stated on page 156, this movement "damaged the cause of the Anglican Communion as much as it did the truth," how can this be called "a further step towards liberty—towards freedom from Papal bondage?"

Again, with respect to Methodism, the are told on page 155 that the "star" of Rev. 9:1, which fell from heaven to the earth, represented Wesley falling as a "star" from the "Anglican heavens," and commencing the formation of the Methodist sect, which began with him as "the first Methodist," in 1728, and lasted for 150 years, till 1878, when "it was cast off from favor."

But how can this be, seeing that it was only in 1728 that Wesley became a "star" in the "Anglican heavens," for it was in that year that he was ordained a priest in the Church of England by Bishop Potter.

Then, as to his "falling" from the "Anglican heavens," Greene's history says: "Wesley never separated himself from the Anglican Church, but to the day of his death, considered himself a member of it, and the movement he had inaugurated as simply a lay movement within the Church."

In any case, while Wesley was always Methodical, and the regularity of his habits of life, earned for him the nickname of "Methodist" from his college mates, yet Method and "Methodism" are two very different things, and he could not, by the biggest stretch of imagination, be called a "Methodist"—using the name in the sectarian sense—at the time of his ordination; for one man or a dozen men could not constitute a sect in the proper sense of the word, which implies at least a definite organization, combined usually (as is the case with "Methodism"), with distinctive teachings.

If this symbol had any application as suggested, at all, the 150 years (supposed) of Methodism should date from Wesley's "fall" as a "star," and not from the time when he became a "star" in the "Anglican heavens."

This, therefore, throws the whole calculation out, and, of course, the basis being wrong, the whole superstructure built upon it falls to the ground.

But let us note further, that this "star" mentioned in Revelation fell from heaven to the "earth."

This is elsewhere in the volume, and also by Pastor Russell, taken to represent a descent from spiritual mindedness to a worldly condition. No one acquainted with Wesley's life would suggest for a moment that this was so in his case. His whole history shows the reverse of this, and was a continual protest against the worldliness and lack of spirituality in the Anglican Church of his day.

It has been suggested, however, that it refers to Wesley's having left the Anglican Communion (heaven) and come down to the level of the common people (earth) among whom his preaching was mainly done, and from whom most of his converts came.

If this is the case then the "locusts" of verse 3 cannot be taken to represent his followers (as alleged) since they came out of the "smoke" (interpreted to mean the confusion caused in the Anglican Church (heaven) by Wesley's teachings), and not from the "earth" (the common people) to which Wesley is supposed to have "fallen."

On the other hand, if the "locusts" do represent Wesley's followers, then Wesley was not the "star" which fell to the "earth," since his followers did not in that case, come from the common ("earthly") people, but from the "Anglican heavens."

Taking this 9th chapter of Rev. and its interpretation a little more in detail:

Verse 1, we read "I saw a star," i.e., Wesley. (See "Vol. 7,' page 155). "Fall from heaven," that is, according to "Vol. 7," Wesley "fell" from the "Anglican heavens" when he began the formation of the "Methodist" sect, which, we are told, was in 1728.

Wesley, however, only became a "star" in 1728, not "fell.' And yet Methodism is supposed to begin when he "fell."

How could he become a "star" and "fall" as a "star" at the same time?

"Fall from heaven to earth."

"Heaven" is here taken to represent the "Anglican heavens" (or, Communion). What authority have we for dividing up "heaven" arbitrarily like this into various sections? Moreover if we take it along this line, then Wesley's "fall" was not to the "earth," but into another section of the Ecclesiastical "heavens"—the Methodist. Wesley's special teaching, and his own life were in the direction of holiness of life—complete consecration to the Lord, as essential.

How could this be called a falling to the earth? If he "fell at all, he fell upward, for he lived on an altogether higher plan than the Church of England, from which he is supposed to have "fallen." Pastor Russell speaks of the Wesleys as "dear men of God—as fully consecrated." (Vol. 6, 141). Greene's history says they revolutionised the religious thought of England, and raised the whole tone of the nation. The Church of England at that time was grossly worldly, materialistic—"earthly."

Continuing, we read (verse 2) : "To him (the fallen angel) was given the key of the pit of the abyss." In "Vol. 7," page 156, we are told that this means that "Wesley was given the key to nothing and to nowhere." This is not so. Wesley brought forward the doctrine of Sanctification, which had been lost sight of just as much as Luther brought to light justification by Faith.

This latter was no new doctrine, but merely one lost sight of. And so with the Sanctification. Both are equally important, and essential to our becoming members of the Body of Christ.

Both Wesley and Luther opened up these as something new in the sense that both had been to a great extent, lost sight of.

Verse 2 (continued): "And there arose a smoke out of the pit."

This "smoke" is said to represent "Methodism," which was "No ordinary smudge," and at the same time to represent the "confusion" caused in the Anglican Communion ("air") by Wesley's teachings. This is somewhat contradictory. Confusion in the Anglican Church and "Methodism" are not exactly the same thing, though the one might conceivably be caused by the other.

Again, if this "smoke" came out of the "pit," as the Revelation states, then how can the "pit" be called "nothing" and "no-where?"

Verse 2 (continued) : "And the sun and the air," (said to represent the Gospel and the Anglican Church) "were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit." This, we are told, means that "Methodism damaged the Anglican Communion as much as it did the truth." ,

How, we could ask, can this be called a "bugle blast of liberty" (see page 144, 159), when it damaged the cause of truth? or how can it be called a freeing from the oppressions of Papacy when England was no longer under restraint to it? (See page 148) Verse 3: "There came out of the smoke locusts."

"Vol. 7" says these represent "an immense number of followers." The only ground for taking these locusts to represent followers of Wesley is the passage in Judges 7:12, where the Midianitish army is compared to locusts for multitude. The comparison here, however, is in respect to their characteristics and not to numbers, as is shown by the description of them which follows.

Verse 3 (continued): "Upon the earth." That is, we are told "among order-loving people."

Why "among" order-loving people? Were Methodists not order-loving? One special feature about the Methodists (of whom Wesley is said to have been the first) was their love of order—method—and gained them their name. (See page 155.)

Verse 3 (continued): "And unto them (the "locusts") was given power." (This is said to represent Methodists in their meetings, praying for the Holy Spirit—"getting the power"—which was "the sight of a life-time") "as scorpions of the earth have power."

This is interpreted to mean that instead of getting the power—the begetting of the Holy Spirit, which they prayed for, all the followers of Wesley received another power, viz., the power to injure men with false doctrines. (Page 157).

Now, if all the followers of Wesley are represented by the "locusts" (as affirmed by Bro. Woodworth in "Vol. 7"), since all the locusts were given this power, this would imply that no follower of Wesley has been begotten of the Spirit, and consequently none will be of the "little flock"—none will be members of the Body of Christ. None has been a Christian in the true sense of the word. If Bro. Woodworth's interpretation of this passage were correct; it would shut out entirely an immense section of professing Christians, comprising some very earnest, and undoubtedly fully consecrated souls from the privileges of the High-calling. But surely even the most ardent opponent of Methodism would scarcely admit the correctness of such a thought.

Verse 4. "And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth."

This "grass" is said to represent "men of independent thought." But what ground is there for taking it to mean this. It is pure surmise, and without anything in the Scriptures to suggest it.

Verse 4 (continued): "Neither any tree." "Tree" here is taken to represent "Saints," though elsewhere, in the majority of instances it is interpreted to mean "Ecclesiastical Institutions" (professedly heavenly, their branches spreading heavenwards, but their roots firmly fixed in the earth). (See page 450, 511, 513.)

Verse 4 (continued): "But only those men which have not the Seal of God in their foreheads"—the unconverted." (Page 157.) In view of this interpretation, the question arises, "If only the unconverted were to be 'hurt' by these 'locusts,' what about the `men of independent thought,' supposed to be represented by the `grass of the earth'?" Are we to presume these, as well as the "Saints," have "the Seal of God in their foreheads"? This suggests that the "grass" or "tree," or both, are misinterpreted.

Verse 5: "To them was it given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months." These five months are taken symbolically and interpreted to mean 150 years.

Now this 150 years is the sole ground on which this whole theory with regard to "Methodism" is based, because it happens to coincide with the length of time which elapsed between the time when Wesley is supposed to have founded Methodism, viz., 1728, and the time when it is said to have come to an end "legally," viz., 1878.

Wesley is said to have become the "first Methodist" in 1728. But how could one constitute a "sect"? Moreover, these 150 years of "Methodism" are spoken of (page 157) as "150 years of widely-prevalent Methodist Hell-fire." This implies that Methodism was fully organized as a sect, and engaged in promulgating its distinctive doctrines during the whole of these 150 years, whereas, as a matter of fact, it did not come into existence as a sect till many years after Wesley's ordination as a minister of the Church of England in 1728, so that the whole theory falls to the ground.

Verse 7: "And the likenesses ("forms" Diaglott) of them (the "locusts") were like horses prepared unto battle." This is explained as meaning that Methodists were "always at it." At what? "Converting" or "praying"?

Verse 7 (continued): "And on their heads were, as it were, crowns like gold." In explanation of this we are told that "gold is a symbol of Divinity," and that "to receive a crown of gold is to be born of the Spirit."

As all the "locusts" had these crowns like gold, and not the real thing, this interpretation would imply that no Methodists will be "born of the Spirit." That is, no Methodist has any prospect of becoming a member of the Body of Christ or of reigning with Him.

Verse 8: "And their teeth were as the teeth of lions." "Able to chew and swallow almost anything," we are told, is the explanation of this passage. Yet on page 78 the "lion" is supposed to represent "Justice," one of the Divine attributes; and there, it is stated as a proof of the aptitude of the symbol as thus used, that the lion, as a rule, "kills only when hungry or attacked, and not for the mere pleasure of killing," which is hardly consistent with the thought given above that the "lion" represents the ability on the part of Methodists to "chew and swallow almost anything."

Verse 9: "And they had breastplates, as it were breastplates of iron." This is said to represent Methodists "deceiving themselves into thinking they had not sinned for years."

As all the "locusts" had these "breastplates," this would imply that there was no Methodist who did not believe he "had not sinned for years." That means that none were "justified' though many thought they were. Yet, we are told (page 158) that "it was to the credit of old-time Methodists that they trusted for salvation in the precious blood of Christ."

Verse 9 (continued) : "And the sound of their wings was as the sound of chariots, of many horses running to battle." This is said to represent the noise which the Methodists made when praying for the Holy Spirit at their meetings.

What justification, we would ask, is there far taking the "noise of their wings" as representing this? It is pure surmise without a scintilla of proof, and in a very bad spirit.

Verse 10: "And they had tails." These tails, we are told mean "followers—class-leaders."

That is these followers of Wesley ("locusts") had followers ("tails"), viz., their "class-leaders."

How can a follower be a leader? And again, the Scripture represents each of the "locusts" as having a "tail," and not just a few "tails" for the lot.

Verse 10 (continued): "Like unto Scorpions." It is explained that these "tails" had two orifices—a "Heaven" orifice and "Hell" orifice. Where is the authority for such a distinction between the two orifices? Do scorpions usually secrete two different kinds of poison which they inject separately. This not following out the figure. Where, too, does the third—the so-called "financial" sting come in? Was this the Lord's thought in this passage?

Note further, that the "locusts" each had a "tail" with a "sting." And since the "locusts" are represented in this interpretation as being the followers of Wesley, and the class-leaders were their "tails," this would imply that they stung themselves by means of their class-leaders; whereas the Scripture represents that all the "locusts" did the stinging—not just, a few; and also that they stung others—not themselves.

Verse 10 (continued): "And in their tails was their power to injure men five months."

We would ask: If these "tails" were the class-leaders of the Methodist Church, as alleged, was that denomination organized in 1728 so that these "tails" could do this work for the 150 years of Methodism's supposed existence? Surely not, for we are told on page 155, "For many years (after 1728) Wesley had no thought of forming a sect."

Then again, we would ask: Have the Methodist class-leaders had no power to injure men with their false doctrines since 1878?

Undoubtedly they have continued ever since, down to the present time, to mislead men through their false teachings, and yet the power to injure, given to the "locusts" was to continue only for five months, so that, even though this period be taken symbolically as representing 150 years, the interpretation given will not fit the facts.

Verse 11:— "And they have their King, the Angel of the Abyss." This "Angel," we are told, is the Devil.

Now if the "locusts" represent the Methodists, this would imply that no Methodist has Christ as his Head—consequently that no Methodist has been truly consecrated, and that, consequently, no Methodist has any hope of Heaven—all are under the headship of the Devil.

It might be noted in passing that this "Angel" had control over the Abyss, and as the "pit" of the Abyss (verse 1) would refer evidently to the lowest part of the Abyss, this, "Angel" would evidently have control over that, too. This would apparently identify him with the "Star" of verse 1, which fell from heaven to the earth, to whom was given the "key" of the "pit of the Abyss"; and if, as seems probable, this "Angel of the Abyss" refers to the Devil—Satan—Lucifer, this would suggest that the "Star" of verse 1, which fell from heaven to the earth, was no other than Lucifer himself.

When examined thus, carefully and critically, the whole of this interpretation relating to Methodism is seen to be erroneous from foundation to finish. And if this is wrong, then it follows that the interpretations of the so-called "four movements of the Reformation proper which preceded it" (see page 160, top) are also wrong.

MORE MISINTERPRETATIONS

As a further instance of misinterpretation I would refer to pp. 465, 466, dealing with Ezek. 21: 14, 15. The passage reads as follows:—

"Thou, therefore, son of man, prophesy, and smite thine hands together, and let the sword be doubled the third time, the sword of the slain; it is the sword of the great men that are slain, which entereth into their privy chambers. I have set the point of the Sword against all their gates that their heart may faint, and their ruins be multiplied; ah! it is made bright, it is wrapped up for the slaughter."

Here the sword is said to be "doubled" three times, and the authors of the volume ingeniously suggest that this refers to Pastor Russell's six volumes of Scripture Studies. The plan by which this conclusion is reached is very simple when one is shown it.

Since there are six vols. of the "Studies" and since the "sword" was to be doubled three times, all we have to do is to divide 6 by 3, which gives 2; 2 is the "double" of 1. So now, to get the desired result—the doubling of the "sword" three times—we simply reverse the process. We take one of Pastor Russell's "Studies"; it matters not which one, I presume; we multiply that one by 2, and thus have the sword "doubled" once, then we multiply that 2 (the "double") by 3, and this gives us the "double" three times. But unfortunately for this theory, this process gives us not the same sword doubled three times but six separate "swords," for no two of the "Studies" are alike, but each brings out truths which are not dealt with in any of the others.

Or, if we take the whole six volumes of "Scripture Studies" as the "sword" (and this appears to be the thought in the interpretation given), then the theory will not fit at all, for the whole set of "Studies" has never been "doubled" once even, let alone three times.

But the whole thought is an unnatural straining of the language used in the prophecy.

The literal meaning of the word rendered "doubled" in the authorized version is "to fold over" or "to repeat" (see Strong's Concordance).

The thought is evidently, that the same "sword" is to be repeated three times, and this is the thought given by Leeser in his translation, where he renders the word "repeated" instead of "doubled"—"let the sword he repeated the third time." Apparently referring to the trouble now upon the world, and which is progressing with increasing severity through the three stages—war, revolution, and anarchy.

Again, take the word "point" in this same passage: "I have set the point of the sword against all their gates."

This word "point" is taken as if it were the literal translation of the Hebrew word used; and we are told that it refers to the so-called "7th Vol.," which is the "point" of the "sword" wielded by Pastor Russell, viz., his six volumes of "Scripture Studies."

The literal meaning of this word is not "point," but "brandishing" (see Strong's Concordance), or, as another dictionary gives it, the "whirl, or swing of the sword," and in the margin of the authorized version it is given as the "glittering" or "fear" of the sword. This last translation is drawn from the thought of the fear inspired by the brandishing of a sword in the hands of an enemy.

The word, however, has no reference whatever to the "point" of the sword; so that the interpretation given is based on a mistranslation.

So also with reference to the phrase "wrapped up" in this same passage (V. 15) the sword is here said (according to the A.V. Translation) to be "wrapped up for the slaughter." In the margin the meaning of the word translated "wrapped up" is given as "sharpened"; and Strong gives it as "Thinned" (as to the edge)—i.e., "sharp."

No other version of the O.T. gives the meaning of the word as "wrapped up," the majority translating it "sharpened." The A.V. translation is manifestly erroneous, but the authors of "Vol. 7" have not been careful to note this, and have based their interpretation on this mistranslation, and declare that the prophet is referring to the types and symbolisms "wrapped up" in Ezekiel and Revelation, and now supposed to be revealed in the "7th Vol." We can see, however, when we get the proper meaning of the word used, that the prophet had no such thought in his mind, but is referring to the efficacy of the "sword" (whatever trouble and destruction this may represent), declaring that "it is made bright, it is sharpened for the slaughter." Another misinterpretation in connection with verse 16 of this same chapter (chap. 21) may be noted here.

The passage reads: "Go thee, one way or the other, either the right hand or on the left whithersoever thy face is set."

This is supposed by the Authors to be addressed to Ezekiel, and, having made up their minds that Ezekiel represents Pastor Russell, they interpret the passage thus: "Wheresoever Pastor Russell and the Truth people set their faces to go, it is authorized for them by the Lord."

I think we will all admit that this is an extraordinary claim to make for Pastor Russell and the "Truth people"; it is a claim for them of practical infallibility. We should note, however, that it is the "sword" that is addressed here, and not Ezekiel. And the word translated "face" here, is translated "edge" in Eccl. 10:10. Leeser and the Septuagint both translate the passage as addressed to the "sword."

Leeser translates it, "Gather up thy strength, go to the right hand, direct thyself, go to the left, whithersoever thy edge is turned." And the Septuagint gives it as, "And do thou (the sword) go on, sharpen thyself on the right, and on the left, whithersoever thy face may set itself."

The "sword" is here addressed by the Lord and bidden concentrate its force to smite on the right, and set itself to slaughter on the left.

I believe the mistake of supposing Ezekiel be a type of Pastor Russell, has been responsible for much twistining and wresting of the Scriptures to make the theory fit. Nor are the writers of the volume consistent on this point as shown on page 291, where we are told that "It is a recognized principle that the antitype is greater than the sum of all the types. This statement is repeated in the "Watch Tower," 1917, page 291. Pastor Russell himself endorses this view in Z. 07-277, where he says:—"The antitype is always on a higher and grander scale than the type."

The inconsistencies and misinterpretations, and misapplications of Scripture throughout the book are so numerous that it would be beyond the scope of these notes even to mention them. Those touched upon are merely given as a sample. I would like to make just a brief reference, however, to its predictions.

MANY UNFULFILLED PREDICTIONS

The entire failure of each and all of these is a striking testimony to the guesswork nature of the interpretations taking them as a whole.

For example, on page 128, we are told that it "Seems conlusive that the hour of Nominal Zion's travail is fixed for over 1918." And on page 177 the deliverance of the Church is shown to have been expected to take place also on or about the same date "as a result of activities by the tribe of Dan."

Nearly a year has passed since then, and yet neither of these events has yet taken place. Again on page 228 we are told that "In the spring of 1918, from that time onward, it will be unsafe to tell the lies that have filled Babylon's exchequers." Thus (9 months later than the time thus indicated) "Babylon" still maintains her position in the world, and there is no indication that her ministers have ceased to preach and teach along accustomed lines, or that it is "unsafe" for them to do so. Again on page 485, the following statement is made:—

"In the year 1918, when God destroys the Churches [?] wholesale, and the Church members by millions, it shall be that any that escape shall come to the works of Pastor Russell to learn the meaning of the downfall of Christianity."

Apart from the fact that events have disproved the correctness of this prediction, one cannot help being amazed at its foolishness. How are the majority of people going to set their minds on the reading of such works as these, comprising some 3,000 pages, amid such scenes of terror and desolation as are here predicted? It is difficult enough for most to do this even in the comparative peace and quiet of normal times. In ordinary circumstances they would require months to go through them even cursorily, even if many hours per day were given to the task.

Again on page 530 it is predicted that Pastor Russell's commission from the Almighty would be proved by "word being flashed throughout the world that Christendom was smitten by revolution" on or about April 27, 1918. It did not come.

Again on page 268 it was predicted that the war would come to an end about October 1, 1917.

Needless to say, this prediction also was unfulfilled, despite the efforts of the "Watch Tower" to lead us to ignore reason and common sense by declaring that the war did end in that month, because Russia, one of the thirty nations (or thereabouts) withdrew from the conflict. But the "Watch Tower's" own words (see Z. 17-378) contradict this very thought for they truly say, "To be fighting is war; to stop fighting is peace." And since Russia withdrew, the heaviest fighting of the whole war occurred. America also—a nation as large and much more powerful—entered the war since then; while even as regards Russia, she re-entered the war later on, being attacked on a large scale by the German Army, and suffering severe losses thereby. Truly, as a sister remarked, if this work has been written, as claimed, under the direction of Pastor Russell, beyond the veil, "He did better work while this side." This book claims to have a special commission to smite Babylon—to burn up the tares.

And in justification of this thought, such passages as this are quoted:

"Reward her as she rewarded you" (Rev. 18:6). And we are told (p. 280) that "A diligent attempt has been made in this direction—anything overlooked will be inserted in the next edition."

How, we would ask, does this spirit harmonize with the declaration, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord"?

As Bro. Russell has pointed out, any interpretation of types and symbols must harmonize with the plain statements of the Scriptures; and nowhere, in the plain teachings of the Word of God, is any such work as this included in the Church's Commission. Such a thought can only be destructive of the spirit of love and meekness which are absolutely essential, if we are to attain to membership in the Lord's Body—the New Creation—possessed of the character-likeness of Christ.

PASTOR RUSSELL'S WISE INSTRUCTIONS

In "What Pastor Russell Said," page 82, Bro. Russell says:

"Do not think, dear friends, that I am saying for a minute that you and I are to strike the image. Oh, no! God has given us no such commission. It is the Heavenly Father who will do the smiting, and you and I have nothing to do with that; but so long as these various civil governments have the power, you and I are to recognize that God gave this power to these Gentile governments, and we are not to seek to disrupt that power; we are to recognize these governments because, as St. Paul tells us, 'The powers that be are ordained of God.' He authorized them to be. He did not say they were His Kingdoms and when any of these Kingdoms claim to be God's Kingdom, they are telling what is fraudulent and wrong. They are Gentile Kingdoms outside of God's Kingdom. The word 'Gentile' in the Scriptures stands for outsiders, those who are not God's people."

I would like to quote here a few words by Bro. Russell in "W. T.," February 15, 1912, bearing on this very subject of reproving the world; and "smiting" the nominal systems, which may be helpful:

"We may learn a lesson from the fact that those two grand characters, John the Baptist and our Lord, each fulfilled his own mission according to the Divine arrangement; but that they had different missions. John's mission was, pre-eminently, that of a reprover and reformer, and we are to understand that, as a prophet, he was supernaturally guided in respect to the various features of the course he took. Our Lord's mission, on the contrary, was a different one. He was gathering to Himself those whom John's ministry served to arouse to righteousness, and to zeal to know and to do the Lord's will. We who are called to be of the Body of Christ, and to follow Him, may learn a lesson in this as respects our proper course.

"We are not sent forth, as John was, to dwell in the wilderness, living and dressing uncouthly, and to criticise and denounce everything and everybody.

"Some of the Lord's dear people fail to notice that such commissions are special and very rare; and sometimes, in following the wrong copy, they undesignedly bring reproach upon the Lord's cause. We are to be copies of God's dear Son, our Lord, and not copies of John the Baptist. We are not to stir up strife by trying to mind other people's business; nor to seek to govern all the affairs of the world; reproving Emperors, Kings, Governors, etc.; but, on the contrary, we are exhorted by the Apostle to remember, that what God sees fit to permit we can see fit to endure. Even though we may find many things which we cannot endorse, we may equally find ourselves able to avoid any special denunciation of them, especially of things which have no bearing whatever upon the proper understanding and fulfilling of the Lord's Word. The Apostle points out the proper position saying, 'As much as lieth in you, live peacably with all men.' And our Lord emphasised the same thought, saying, 'Blessed are the peace-makers, for they shall be called the Children of God.'"

Again (Z. 16-267), Bro. Russell says: "The tendency to speak evil of dignitaries, and to belittle them, to caricature them, is a prevalent sin, which is doing much more to undermine good government than the fun-makers seem to realize. Undoubtedly there are times and ways for protesting against things and methods with which we do not fully agree. But the People of God should, pre-eminently, stand for law and order, with as much justice as may be attainable, waiting for absolute justice until the King of kings shall take His Millennial throne. His command to us meantime [written Sept. 1, 1916] is, that we 'be subject to the powers that be'; and 'follow peace with all men so far as possible.'"

The work of Pastor Russell has been a unique work. No man since the days of the Apostles has been so used to open up the Bible, and reveal God's plan. His whole life was an inspiration; so thoroughly was it given over to the Lord. His whole heart was so fully bent on doing his Creator's will—his mind so continually occupied on ways and means to send out the light and knowledge which had come to him through his earnest and prayerful study of the Word, and the Lord's grace, that the influence was to help one more correctly to balance the Heavenly things against the earthly joys and prospects, and to seek first the Kingdom of God. One cannot get away from the fact that he was a particular servant of God, sent for the particular purpose of bringing "meat in due season" to the household of faith at the end of the Gospel Age.

Never before had there been such a movement for the overthrow of error and superstition. Consequently we can well understand that the great Prince of Darkness would be much on the alert to thwart and prevent the work. "We are not ignorant of his devices," the Apostle declares. Satan has always been alert to bring in counterfeits and delusions, to hinder the spread of Truth. After each flow of Truth—after each reform movement, he has attempted to choke it or to throw it into confusion.

Should we then be surprised if Satan should endeavor to bring reproach and disaster to the work of Pastor Russell? No, indeed!

It would rather be a surprise if some attempt were not made in this direction. It is only natural to expect that some special attempt would be made at Pastor Russell's death, when the restraining and guiding influence of his personality was removed.

Many times have we been warned against Satan in the Scriptures as being a wily foe, far more than a match for mankind unaided by the Spirit of God, and, even in the case of those begotten of the spirit, needing constant watchfulness and humble reliance on the strength and wisdom of the Lord to prevent their being tripped up by him.

The Apostle points out that, to the Lord's people he appeared as an "Angel of light."

How would he attempt to deceive "Truth" people, those who have been blessed with the wonderful enlightenment of this harvest period?

Only by seeming to come as an "Angel of Light"—a Messenger of Truth, along the lines of this volume. Seeming to follow Pastor Russell, but placing wrong constructions on many of his words; treating his suggestions as if inspired; giving little twists to Scripture to make it apparently fit—thus leading to delusions; also, even when the things are true, introducing the wrong spirit—use of carnal methods, slander, reviling sarcasm, and scorn—"deeds of the flesh." '

Surely, the great claims made by, and on behalf of the Society, indicate a state of mind the reverse of humble, and far removed from that manifested by Bro. Russell.

They claim to be the "channel." They practically deify Pastor Russell—say he was the Lord's Channel for dispensing truth etc., and then direct the glory to themselves, saying, "Now we are the channel continued." They claim to be "another angel from the Altar," and state in the "Watch Tower" (1918, page 7) "It is now time to obey the Voice of the Angel."

They declare that this production of theirs must be accepted by all who will be overcomers. If we fail to accept it, we will not belong to "the little clock," "the Gideon Band," "The Elijah Class," etc.—won't go up in the "Chariot," won't get the "penny,", etc., etc.

In the "Watch Tower," March 1, 1918, all the Ecclesias are urged to reject any brethren as Elders who do not accept this volume, and are not willing to teach it, and who are not in harmony with the present methods of the Society—surely no more Papal method of dealing with the Lord's people was ever attempted!

In the "Watch Tower," 1917 page 293 it is stated that "There would be no reason why the Lord should change His Channel, or 'Chariot,' or method of bearing His Message to His people."

I would point out in reply to this, that the Watch Tower Society never has been the Lord's Channel in the sense suggested in this statement.

Pastor Russell—not the Society—was the Lord's Chosen Messenger or "Channel."

Pastor Russell formed the W. T. Society simply to facilitate the putting forth of his message; and it was never used for the purpose of putting forth any message from any of the brethren associated with him. In confirmation of this statement I quote Bro. Russell's own words in reply to a question in "What Pastor Russell Said," page 350. He says there:

"So far as the headquarters at Brooklyn is concerned, and my own identification with the work there, let me say, everything is under my supervision. Nothing emanates from there contrary to my conscience. . . . While there are many wise and capable brethren at the Brooklyn office, yet by present arrangement they are my assistants under my general supervision as long as I live. That was the arrangement made when I turned my property over to the Society years ago. This applies also to the Society's work in foreign lands."

Nor is there any indication that the Society since Bro. Russell's death is being used as the Lord's "Channel" for bringing fresh messages to His people.

The Lord never used a business organization based on a money vote, as His mouth-piece, to give forth "meat in due Season" to His people.

The "Society" consists of all subscribers of £2 and upwards towards the funds. Many of these subscribers are not consecrated, though appreciative of the truth, and have contributed large sums for carrying on the work. Each £2 carries with it the right to a vote—thus one unconsecrated person might easily outvote many consecrated persons; who are often very poor in regard to this world's goods, even though rich in faith and love. Bro. Russell passed away when his work was done, and it is presumption for any man, or men, to assume to represent him in his capacity as the Lord's Servant or Channel.

In the preface to the volume, page 5, it is stated:

"For anyone to arrogate to himself the authority to write end publish the 7th Vol. would, we believe, be presumptuous before the Lord."

Who, then, we would ask, gave authority to write this and send it forth as Pastor Russell's Seventh Volume, and the Lord's Message?

They claim that Pastor Russell, since his death, is "still managing every feature of the harvest work;" that they are under his special guidance (Z. 17-325, "Vol. 7," 144, 291, etc.); and that the Lord has assumed a responsibility for their work. They also claim to have published the greatest book ever printed. Surely these great claims should make us beware, for egotism does got indicate greatness in the Lord's service. The thought that he would make "that faithful servant" "ruler over all that He harvest work," is taken from our Lord's promise of Luke 12:44, that He would make "that faithful servant" "ruler over all that He hath." There seems, however, no justification for supposing that this would apply to Pastor Russell beyond the veil. The thought is based on Rev. 14:13; but there the only legitimate inference is that, as the "feet members" pass beyond the veil, they will continue to be occupied with "Kingdom" work, as they have been this side, and this is all that is suggested by Bro. Russell in his comments on this passage (see Vol. 3, 238; Vol. 4, 622, 624.).

There is nothing in Luke 12:44 to suggest that the custody of the Master's goods would extend beyond the veil. It is purely surmise, and no ground for basing an important interpretation of Scripture upon. Where, we would ask, is Paul? Where are Peter and the rest of the Apostles?

Have they—the foundation stones—not an equal interest with Bro. Russell in the great work now in progress? Have we any reason to suppose the Lord would give them subordinate positions in it?

Pastor Russell was surely the last Messenger to the Gospel Church; he was the faithful steward; he gave his message, and served the "household" with the "Meat" due, and there is no indication of any other angel with power to write or speak any further Messages to the Church.

Other truths, possibly, will open up, for the truth is to shine more and more unto the "perfect day," but we should be content to wait until the Lord opens up His Word, and not attempt to force interpretations.

This volume has come to us with great pretensions. On the surface it sounds plausible, and many of the Lord's people have been inclined to take it at its own valuation. There has been a disposition with many to place too great reliance on the fact that it has come from those whom they believed they had reason to trust—a "worshipping of angels"—i.e., an undue reverence for human agencies, instead of "holding the Head" in proper esteem, and following His explicit injunction to "Prove all things." Few have attempted to "prove" it, except in a very cursory manner either by sanctified commonsense, or by the Word of God.

There has been an unwillingness in many cases to use reason in their examination of it, for fear they may possibly be rejecting something that is from the Lord; and, in some cases, there has been a fear—stimulated by articles appearing in the "Watch Tower" that if they reject, or fail to put it out, they will not be of the "Elijah Class;" the "little flock," and so on. Some have been inclined to condemn those who have withdrawn from those Ecclesias which have accepted "The Finished Mystery," and are engaged in circulating the volume or literature based upon it; and who have also withdrawn their support from the Watch Tower Society.

The ground of their condemnation, in the main, is that those who have done this are not manifesting the spirit of love towards their brethren, in doing so.

A little reflection, I think, will show the groundlessness of this charge, and that those who have separated themselves could not do otherwise without violating their consciences. This volume has been sent forth by the W. T. B. and T. Society, as the Divine interpretation of a portion of God's Word. Many of the Lord's people, after a careful examination of it, have satisfied themselves that it is not what it professes to be, and that in sending it abroad, the Society is promulgating what is false, in the name of Truth. Hence by continuing their support of the Society in these circumstances they would be assisting in the propagation of erroneous teachings, and would assuredly be guilty before the Lord.

Similarly, in the case of those Ecclesias who have adopted, and are putting forth these teachings; each member of an Ecclesia is responsible individually for what the Ecclesia does as a whole; on the same principle that each member of any of the babylonian elects is responsible for the teachings for which that sect stands; and which it is engaged in promulgating.

The reason for the call to the Lord's people to come out of Babylon is given—viz., that they be not "partakers of her sins," implying that those who remain connected with her after their eyes are opened to the falsity of her teachings are reckoned by the Lord as responsible for the same, and partakers of her guilt.

And so, those who continue their membership and support of a class engaged in putting out these new teachings after they recognize that they are untrue, will, I believe, be reckoned by the Lord as guilty of the same, even though they, personally, may not put out a single tract.

There is an important principle involved here, and the as "Truth" people, whose eyes have been enlightened in regard to these things, ought to be the very first to recognise it; and yet, strange to say, people of the world seem to be able often to see this more clearly than some of us.

During Bro. Russell's lifetime, and also after his death, so long as the W. T. Society remained loyal to the Truth, we were all in hearty accord with it, and supported it to the full extent of our ability, but when it departed from this course, and began the propagation of teachings contrary to the truth, and to endeavor to "lord it over God's heritage"—the Church—we had no option but to withdraw our support entirely. We should have done the same in the case of Bro. Russell had he acted similarly, even though we were indebted to him by the Lord's, grace, for all the knowledge of "present truth" we possess.

The wisdom which is from above is first pure, then peacable. The wisdom which is suggested by our great Adversary is Peace apart from principle; and we may be sure that if we neglect the Divine wisdom for the wisdom from beneath, even though the latter may seem to our poor fallen judgment, the best policy, we are sure to suffer spiritually, with the possibility of our being turned eventually right out of the way.

"Thou shalt guide me with thy counsel, and afterward receive me to glory."

There is no lack of love shown in separating from the brethren for this cause; on the contrary, love for the brethren is quite compatible with our refusal to follow them in a wrong course.

A STRONG SECTARIAN SPIRIT

The strongly sectarian spirit which has been manifested by the Society since "The Finished Mystery" made its appearance, and which culminated in the article in the "Watch Tower" of March 1st, 1918, urging the various Ecclesias to reject as Elders any brother who could not see his way to support the Society in the new methods and teachings it has adopted, and found himself unable to accept or teach "The Finished Mystery," become more and more pronounced as time has gone on and is making its influence steadily felt in this direction in those Ecclesias remaining with it. Indications of this have been multiplying more and more, and in the "Watch Tower" of November 1, 1918 (page 324), the Society (and its supporters) are identified as the true Church. We read there:

"An early demise of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society was predicted by some. . . . During the past few months the grand old ship, which has weathered the storms of centuries, has passed through some terrific gales. The powers of the air have done their worst to destroy it, but the fact that it is still afloat [i.e., in the shape of the W. T. B. and T. Society, whose early demise had been predicted by some'], is due to the other fact that 'the Lord is in the ship.' Some, fearing the storm, have deserted the ship [i.e., the W. T. Society], forgetful that our safety lies in remaining in it [i.e., in the Society]. We pity them, and rejoice that the majority have stood the test."

Would it be possible, I would ask, for any more Papal claim to be made than this?

This is precisely the attitude the Roman Catholic Church has taken up during the many centuries of her existence. Her claim is that she, and she alone, is the true Church, and that she—the grand old ship—the "true Church," has successfully "weathered the storms of centuries," and that "the only safety" of any lies in "remaining in the ship"—the Roman Catholic Church. A creed has been framed and adopted by the W. T. Society, acceptance of which, and harmony with the Society as at present constituted, are made fundamental conditions of Christian fellowship which are "outside the pale of discussion;" and, according to the "Watch Tower," any who are unable to acquiesce in these, whatever their previous Christian standing, are to be treated as "worldlings."

That I have not overstated the position is shown by the subjoined correspondence between the Watch Tower Society's representative for Australasia, and Bro. Hart—formerly one of the managers for the I. B. S. A. in England, and latterly, the Watch Tower Society's representative in India.

The question for each of us individually is, which "Head" are we going to make our own—the Lord Jesus Christ, or the Watch Tower Society with the new tests it has imposed?

In closing, I wish to say that these notes are not intended as, in any sense, an exhaustive criticism of the matters referred to. Numberless other points illustrative of the misstatements and misinterpretations of the volume I have omitted; my only object being to give a sufficient number to show the falsity of its claim to be either Pastor Russell's production, or a true interpretation of the books of Ezekiel and Revelation. It has been suggested by some that we ought to accept these interpretations unless we can give something better. But this is a very illogical argument; for it would mean that we are bound to accept any interpretation of any portion of God's Word, if we could not put forth one more feasible, even if it were not His due time for its unfolding, and therefore could not be truly interpreted by any one.

In conclusion, I earnestly pray that Our Heavenly Father will so guide and direct each of His children, that they may be kept from falling; and that the earnest desire and aim of each one of us may be that we may get a more and more exact knowledge of His will and have grace given us to do it.

February, 1919. C. F. MAIN.

The following is a copy of the correspondence between Bro. Hart (late of India), and the representative of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society for Australasia, referred to above.

(COPY.)

495 Collins Street, Melbourne,

17th December, 1918.

Dear Bro. Hart,

Greetings in the Lord.

Your letters of the 5th and 11th December are both to hand, and I am somewhat perplexed. Yesterday I received a letter-wire from Bro. Lazenby, informing me that you were resigning from the Society to work with the Bible Students' Union, and your letters read differently. I sincerely trust that there has been some mistake.

I have wired you either to confirm or deny the report, and shall await your reply with some anxiety.

I cannot think that, after your long and useful career in the service of the Lord and the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, you would take a step so fatal to your own spiritual life, nor will I believe it until I see it over your own signature.

You have my sympathy re your treatment by the Indian authorities. These experiences have long been expected, and now they are here, they bear witness to the fact that we are in the time of the end, and that the dark night is closing down. Surely in these circumstances the policy of wisdom is to rally to the Lord's cause and to the instrument which He has so long used in the Harvest Work, and which you and I have had the honor to represent in different parts of the earth—The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society—instead of drawing away disciples after ourselves and setting up organizations designed to hinder the spread of the Harvest Message.

While I appreciate your well-meant efforts to "pour oil on the troubled waters," I think these are due to your being unfamiliar with the conditions in Australia. There are no longer any troubled waters to pour oil upon, dear Brother. There are two boats, and the question is, which one are you traveling in. To use a now familiar simile—there has been a big sifting amongst the Australian brethren, and the truths of the Seventh Volume have been the instrument to accomplish it. As you are aware, a new organization has been formed that is actively and openly obstructing the Harvest Work—or trying to—throughout Australia. They refuse to accept Vol. 7, and we refuse to surrender it, so there is no room for compromise. We are not smiting those who oppose themselves by opposing the Harvest Work, though we are charged falsely to have done so. Nor are we sitting in judgment upon them. To their own Master they stand or fall. But where there is such a fundamental divergence of opinion, it would be equally foolish to attempt conciliation. All who are prepared to accept the "Finished Mystery" as the Seventh Volume of Scripture Studies, and to work in harmony with the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society as at present constituted, will find us ready to make many concessions, but these fundamental principles are outside the pale of discussion. The Harvest Work is going forward grandly, supported by the efforts and sacrifices of loyal brethren in every part of Australia, and while the schismatic efforts of our quondam brethren have resulted in the seduction of a few here and there, the majority remain firm, and the work goes on even better than before. We can dispose of more G's than we can procure, and the Fall of Babylon tract has gone out with a rush that has astonished even ourselves. We can only conclude that it is the Lord's doings, and marvelous in our eyes.

If you are at one with us on the two points already mentioned, then we will welcome you to our midst.

I do not know if the American Office have a cable address; if so, I have never heard of it. Their new address is:

Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society,
310 Martin Bg., Federal St., Nth Side, Pitts., Pa., U.S.A.

I shall be glad to see you in Melbourne, and have a talk with you. I expect also to have a reply to my wire, and possibly another letter before you leave Perth.

With Christian love to you, and praying for you the Lord's guidance and blessing that you may be kept faithful unto death,

I am, your Brother in Christ,

(Signed) WM. W. JOHNSTON.

19th December 1918

Dear Bro. Hart:

Your wire of the 10th inst., which reads, "Have resigned Society March Tower unseen India; future plans indefinite," to hand.

I am somewhat surprised to hear this after hearing from your letter of recent date that you have not any definite opinions on the differences prevailing here. If in these circumstances you have taken action from anything appearing in March 1st Tower, then I can only characterize such action as hasty and ill-considered, and to express my deepest sorrow. I shall await a further letter from you before dealing further with the matter, as I feel sure you will agree with me that your action warrants a better explanation than your wire conveys. With deepest sorrow, yet with Christian love,

I am, your Brother in Christ,

(Signed)
WM. W. JOHNSTON,

(COPY.)

17 Stanmore Street
Subiaco, W.A.

Dear Bro. Johnston,

Greetings in the Lord.

Your letters of the 17th and 19th inst. have duly reached me, and I thank you for the evident trouble you have taken to acquaint me with the true situation here in Australia. I quite agree that my former letters were written under a misapprehension of the serious nature of the claims advanced by the Society under its present management, as to what will henceforth be recognized by the I.B.S.A. as "fundamental principles" "outside the pale of discussion," and the acceptance of which is indispensable to further Christian fellowship amongst those of "like precious faith" who have hitherto held sweet converse together in Zion. During the first few days of my stay at Hensman Road, I heard a great deal about local differences in Perth, and was told that these were the real causes of the division here; hence my letter to you that I had no definite opinion re the differences prevailing here. Immediately I realized the extent to which matters had progressed, I took the only step possible in the circumstances, and promptly severed my connection with the Society, as at present constituted, and sought fellowship with those who were willing to receive me on a Scriptural footing. You characterize this step as "hasty and ill-considered," but how inconsistent! The article in March 1 "Watch Tower," referred to in my wire, clearly states that no class should elect as elder a brother not in full harmony with the points you yourself declare to be "fundamental principles." A representative and Pilgrim of the Society is, ipso facto, an Elder in a still wider sense, and should, of course, be in full harmony with what the Society from time to time may declare to be its fundamentals. I do not accept the "Finished Mystery" as the Seventh Volume, nor do I agree with many of its statements, which are demonstrably false. If to act in accordance with my conscience, and to refuse to act a lie by continuing to represent a Society whose teachings I can no longer endorse is a "hasty and ill-considered" action, your characterization is quite correct, dear Brother. I may remind you, however, that the "Seventh" Volume has been before me for several months, and had the issue been forced in India as you and your friends are doing here, my decision would have been the same. It was the camouflage of the Society's friends here in Perth that perplexed me for a few days.

The telegram of advice to you by the Brother you mention, is like so much of the "Seventh" Volume, not strictly accurate! I did not resign from the Society to work with the Bible Students' Union. I resigned because I strongly disapprove of the course the former is pursuing, and I have made no arrangements so far to work with the latter; whether I eventually do so will be as the Lord may direct.

I think you are wise, Brother, in putting your two "fundamental principles" outside the "pale of discussion." They certainly would not stand very much investigation, and the only way possible to impose them upon the majority is to follow the example of the R.C. Church, and insist upon the recognition of an infallible medium for communicating doctrines which must not be questioned, the source of them being held to be indisputable. But how contrary such an article is to the closing sentiments under the caption, "This journal and its sacred mission" on the inside cover of each issue of the "Watch Tower," which the Society still prints, but admittedly does not now endorse. Can you harmonize the present attitude of the Society regarding "fundamentals" with Pastor Russell's articles in "W.T.," 1913, page 231, entitled, "Doctrines More or Less Important," wherein he emphasises that the fundamental principles of the Christian faith centre round belief in the Atonement, and distinctly states:—"The fundamentals have been enjoyed by good saintly ones from the Day of Pentecost until now."

Aside from this, your letter, dear Brother, breathes a similar spirit to that of the book in question. Your reference to "the schismatic efforts of our quondam brethren" and your charge that they are opposing the Harvest work (after it is finished, according to the "Finished Mystery") does not strike just that note that one would expect from a Fellow Member of the Body. May I remind you that the Lord alone, not any individual or society, can cut off from membership in that Body those who do not see eye to eye with you on "Vol. 7," and render them "quondam brethren." The absence of any such spirit in those who cannot accept the book, is in itself a striking testimony to the power of the Spirit animating them. And is not your assumption that you are entitled to an "explanation" of my action in itself an evidence of the spirit of lordship that has been manifesting itself of late?

Am I not accountable to the Head rather than to a fellow member?

Finally, dear Brother, bear in mind that there is here no attitude of opposition to the Harvest work, or to our Brethren who find help in the "7th" Volume. The mere fact that no cleavage occurred in India is proof of the fact that disruption is caused not by those disagreeing with the book forcing their objections upon others, but, vice versa, the trouble arises when those who find the book "meat" to them, seek to force it upon those to whom it is "poison." The Bible Students' Union has been formed, I understand, to publish Bro. Russell's writings, and as it is agreed in "Volume Seven" that he is the special messenger of the Harvest period, it passes my comprehension how you can truthfully say that the publication of his writings, instead of those of Bros. Rutherford, Woodworth, and Fisher, is hindering the Harvest work.

When you are prepared to offer me a welcome on the basis of my relationship to the Lord, as laid down in the Scriptures, you will find me ever ready to respond.

With Christian love,

I am (in spite of yourself),
Your Brother in the Lord,

A.A. HART.

(COPY.)

C/o Bible Students' Tract Society,
Temple Court, Melbourne,
16th December, 1918

To the Executive Committee,
Watch Tower Bible and Tract