"THAT SERVANT"?

“THAT SERVANT”

A VIEW BY A TRUTH-SEEKER

AMONG the many subjects which have been debated by Bible Students through the years in class meetings, conventions and in private discussions, is "who is `that servant' mentioned in Matthew 24:45-47 and Luke 12:37-44?" It is a question we believe of great importance. Its value can be estimated by the fact that it still occupies the minds of many. Some, in a more private way, have studied the matter, together with facts and circumstances as they have been known to exist for over a century. The results of such discussions and private studies vary—some are "sure" of one view; others are "sure" of another; while yet others are sure of no view at all, but revel in doubt.

All earnest truth-seekers know that the words of the Lord in this regards are significant, and there are those who believe that they have been fulfilled. We believe that all should not only know these things, but should have the additional knowledge as to the person or persons in whom these Scriptures have been fulfilled.

In expressing this view, there is no intention to forcibly treat the subject at hand. As in all things, it is a matter in which every man must "be persuaded in his own mind" (Romans 14:5) As a result, we have been moved to give some serious consideration to the subject, and merely desire to express it. It should be noted that much, perhaps too much, has been written about this subject by influences emanating from persons of "itching ears" and mor¬bid desires for something new. That being said, if the view expressed within these pages prove to be productive among the Lords people, not only will the action be justified, but gratitude will be rendered to God for His grace and providential overruling.


AN EXAMINATION OF MATTHEW 24:45-47

In preceding verses, our Lord pointed out certain things which would transpire prior to and during His Second Advent and expressed in the form of a question (verse 45), the appointment of "that servant" at an early time of His Presence. In that question there is a suggestion that the said appointment would be contingent upon something necessary to justify or warrant it. That contingency is faithfulness and wisdom. The Scriptures show that the ser¬vant found "watching" and possessing qualities of faith and wisdom (in a marked degree) would be appointed "ruler over all his (the Lord's) goods"; that is general truths pertaining to the Divine Plan of the Ages, especially due to be understood during the Second Presence of the Lord, which Plan the Father had entrusted to His Son for execution. The Scriptures further show that upon the servant so appointed would devolve the specific duties of serving the “household of faith” meat (portions of the Lord's goods) in due season” (from time to time as such truths became due to be understood and served).

AN EXAMINATION OF LUKE 12: 37-44.

In the Luke account additional details are given by including an account of the Lord's words concerning "those servants" who would be found "watching" on His arrival, and how they would be dealt with. The account, thereafter, is the same as that by Matthew. The application or fulfillment must also be the same. Concerning "those servants," it is very important to note the promise of the Lord that He would "gird himself and make them to sit down to meat and serve them"; and, as an indirect answer to Peter's question (v. 41), He signified an action which He would take with respect to the said servants, which answer might be taken as a confirmation of the promise and an indica¬tion of the means He would employ for carrying it out—(since He must of necessity use some visible instrumentality for the purpose—Eph. 4:11, 12), namely, the appointment of a "steward" or "servant" through whom the "household" (including the rest of "those ser¬vants") would receive "their portion of meat in due season."

BOOK OF REVELATION
(Chapters 1, 2 and 3)

In connection with this subject, it has been further thought fit to consider passages in the Book of Revelation. Reference is made to "stars," which the Lord Himself explains to mean "angels," (Chap. 1:16, 20). The word "star" as figuratively or symbolically used in the Scriptures conveys the thought derived from the literal star in the heavens, for example, a bearer of heavenly light. It signifies a teacher of divine truths. It is also used in reference to a teacher in the ecclesiastical heavens, even though, by reason of his unsteadfastness and false teachings, he would be more particularly symbolized by one of the meteoric stars—(Rev. 6:13; 12:4)—rather than by one of the real kind of stars—fixed stars. When one such light bearer is meant, the word is used in the singular and in the plural number when two or more are intended. Such seems to be the logical manner in which the word is symbolically used in the Book of Revelation.

In the Scriptures, the word "angel" is used in several ways, the meaning in each use should be of interest to the earnest Bible student. The word is an official designation of a messenger on the spirit realm, and it is used in the same manner with reference to an earthly messenger of God. In certain parts of the Book of Revelation, it is evident that the word is applicable to a movement or instrumentality permitted by God in the working out of the affairs in the Church's history. Whenever one such spiritual or earthly messenger, or such movement or instrumentality is meant, the word, logically, is used in the singular number—"angel." It is, therefore, used in the plural to denote two or more such messengers, move¬ments or instrumentalities as the case may demand. In Revelation 1:20 the word "angels" applies to persons—messengers of God who have operated on the earth; and in Rev. 2 and 3, the word is used in the sin¬gular form with reference to one of those seven angels previously men¬tioned. This is a very simple way of reasoning and understanding, al¬most too simple to mention. Its necessity, however, will be realized as advance is made in the treatment of the subject under consideration.


Using the method of proving Scriptures by Scriptures, it is noticed that in Rev. 12:1 mention is made of "twelve stars"—evidently mean¬ing twelve individuals,—(the twelve Apostles of the Lamb), special light bearers; so, consistently, the "seven stars" of Rev. 1:16 mean seven individuals (whoever they might be), light bearers in greater or lesser capacities.

In 1 Cor. 11:10, it is seen that the Apostle makes use of the word "angels," evidently referring to the duly elected elders and teachers in an assembly of Christian brethren, saying. "For this cause ought the wo¬man to have power (or a covering) on her head because of the angels." As the word, in the plural, has reference to the many, so, logically, the word "angel" wherever it occurs in Rev. 2 and 3 refers to a single elder or teacher duly recognized or appointed. It does not seem true that the word "servant," "angel" or "star" in the Scriptures under con¬sideration is used to denote a class or body of persons, "composite" or "corporate," and any attempt to inject such a meaning into these Scrip¬tures may be likened to an attempt at destroying the pure and good by a process of inoculation. Therefore, the Scriptures seem to point out a servant (whoever he might be) distinguishable from others by reason of his OFFICE.

Some Bible commentators agree that the "seven stars" or "an¬gels"—(special messengers or servants of God)—existed in seven dif¬ferent stages of the Church's history, represented by the seven descrip¬tive names of places mentioned in the Chapters under review. It is also agreed that we are living in the seventh or last stage, known as the Laodicean period to which has belonged the special work of the seventh "star" or "angel"—whoever that might be. This seems to be in strict conformity with the appointment of a special "servant" or "steward" to do a specific work during a specific period of time as already gleaned from an examination of Mat. 24:45-47 and Luke 12: 37-44. And the Scriptures do not indicate the necessity for a successor or successors to the one whom God, through His dear Son, would so appoint.


WHO FILLED THE OFFICE OF CHIEF "SERVANT" OR
"ANGEL" IN THE SEVENTH STAGE OF THE CHURCH?


A way of knowing whether or not there has been given time and shown tolerance in expressing the view that the Scriptures indicate the appointment of an individual as that servant," similar consideration is requested in presenting the reasoning whereby the earnest Truth-seeker may find out, beyond any reasonable or logical refutation, the one who might have been thus appointed of the Lord.

LOOKING OVER THE PAST AND PRESENT

Since the Master did not give any physical description by which all might readily determine who "that servant" would be, all will concede that a reasonable method of determination would be to consider the pro¬fessions and religious activities of supposed servants of God, who were or are conspicuous in service, in the period in which such an one should figure—(at most during the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries)—in order to find out which one would most particularly measure up to what should reasonably be expected of a special servant or messenger of God, —in consecration, understanding, and the faithful dispensation of the Master's "goods." The results of such activities must also be taken into consideration, since the work of the Lord, through such an appointed one, was intended to accomplish some spiritual good among the house-hold of faith, strengthening them in spiritual things, assisting them in the development of righteousness, and otherwise witnessing to the world. In adopting this method which is not only reasonable but im¬partial, the writer has considered the professions and activities of per-sons such as Miller, Barbour, Russell, Adams, Barnes, Birkes, Lord, Seiss, French, Streeter, Rutherford, Hoskins, Johnson, Emil and Otto Sadlack, and others—men who have been more or less devout in their search for truth, active according to their convictions, and whose find¬ings have had the endorsements of others, to greater or lesser extents, numerically and by way of sincerity.

After serious consideration in an effort to arrive at some proper con¬clusion, accompanied by prayer for Divine guidance, it has been found that, while all the above mentioned persons may be termed "Biblical Students" with more or less useful service to others, the highest Scrip¬tural requirements of a special servant of God have been met in the case of one of those men, viz: RUSSELL. This man was undoubtedly the greatest expositor of Biblical Truths within the liberal period mentioned ; and his consecrated service extended over a period of 40 years and reached unto all parts of the earth with unspeak¬ably good results. This fact, together with the attested purity of his life, is sufficient to justify this conclusion in any mind which is free from prejudice, blindness, egotism and bigotry.

On the basis of the examination of the aforementioned Scriptures, which unequivocally disclose the fact that "that servant" is one person, and also of this glance into the past and present, it is established in the mind of the writer that the "faithful and wise servant" of Mat. 24:45-47, Luke 12:37-44, or the "star," "angel" or seventh messenger in the last stage of the Church's history, WAS and IS CHARLES T. RUSSELL, who, many students of the Bible believe, is now an immortal being in the realms above.

OTHER REASONS FOR A CONCLUSION THAT "THAT SERVANT"  WAS ONE PERSON, AND THAT HE HAS BEEN CORRECTLY NAMED

Jesus and the Apostles used earthly objects and things to illustrate heavenly ones. The writer, therefore, has no apology to offer for using an earthly arrangement to support the view of the appointment of a special servant in the "end" of the Gospel Age, when, as in temporal knowledge, there was to be a great increase in spiritual knowledge, which had to be diffused throughout the earth in a timely and system¬atic manner for the accomplishment of the purposes of God. In every earthly business arrangement where servants are involved, with a view to the preservation of order and the proper distribution of service, there is always an appointee to act in the capacity of "chief" servant or over-seer. The Lord knew about such a procedure among worldly peo¬ple and did not disapprove it, though He discouraged a selfish striving for position of prominence and any tendency to lord over others, and exhorted the brethren to assume and practice a differ¬ent attitude in the Church of God, saying, "Whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant." If such an arrangement in its proper performance is necessary in earthly affairs it does not seem less necessary and proper in the "Father's business" for the judicious and faithful distribution of His work along the lines of decency and order, which "is heaven's first law.

It is important to observe that in the Scriptures (Luke 12:37-44) while reference is made to "those servants" who would be watching, on the Lord's return, there is no mention of their being appointed as rulers or as a `composite" or "corporate" body to rule over the Master s goods, (and here would be the logical place for any such mention).

If “that servant” is a corporate body, or “all faithful servants of God,” as some claim, it is reasonable to expect that as such they would be corporated for the purpose of the work and service at an early time in the Lord's presence and be responsible as a whole for the dispensa¬tion of the "meat"; but the following questions seem to prove to the contrary (so far as we are aware): who, over a century ago, wrote "Food for Thinking Christians" of which 1.4 million copies (a phenomenal amount in those days) were distributed locally and in foreign countries? Who in 1886 wrote the book: "The Divine Plan of the Ages," which contains an un¬folding of God's Great Plan for human salvation in a more simple and understandable way than any other book on earth? Who wrote the other five volumes comprising what are known as "Studies in the Scriptures" which the publishers of this treatise have read and found to contain, among other helpful things, the most reasonable and logical exposi¬tions of Biblical topics that have ever been offered to truth-seekers? Who wrote that little book called "Tabernacle Shadows" which contains the first general insight into the Plan of God as indi¬cated in the Levitical types and shadows, since the days of the Apos¬tles? Who compiled the greatest Biblical Drama ever shown on earth? Who was responsible for the writing of that "Sacred Journal" called "The Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence" which, for nearly 40 years, fed and satisfied the hearts of thousands of truth-seekers and truth-lovers throughout the world and continues to do via the Reprints? Who wrote the hundreds of differ¬ent Tracts and booklets containing TRUTHS, of which hundreds of millions of copies were distributed throughout the world of “Christendom”? Through whose instrumentality (direct or indi¬rect) have many thousands of Christian people of all nations, kindreds and tongues (including present-day watching faithful servants) re¬ceived their first ray of light into God's plan for the salvation of the Church and of the world? There is only one answer to all these questions, and it is obvious to all who know. The answer has helped to support the view that "that servant" was one individual, and that he did as he was commanded—Ezekiel 9:11

During the earthly ministry of that man of God, enlightened people rejoiced in the revealed Plan and realized their privileges of co-operat¬ing in what many call the "Harvest Work;" so they went forth in joyful service under the guidance of the Lord through His visible represen-tative, "that servant." This was co-operation. "We are workers to¬gether with God." It does not seem that co-operation then, nor since, conveys the thought of a "corporate" body as the faithful and wise ser¬vant for the purposes of the Scriptures already examined.

And what can be said of those "co-workers," "fellow-servants" who yet "remain”? It would seem that they ought to continue along the same lines of instruction and humble service—in faithfulness, obedi¬ence and love, "abounding therein with thanksgiving" (without neces¬sarily being enslaved to every single thought or word expressed by the chief servant, as he never expected any to do), and give due defer¬ence to the OFFICE held, and labor of love performed, by the one who was appointed of the Lord to do a special work, recognizing his ministry, in the whole, as second to none, save that of the Lord and the Apostles.

OBJECTIONS AND OPPOSITE VIEWS CONSIDERED

The publishers of this booklet are not satisfied in just examining Scriptures and expressing views, but have considered it proper in the spirit of im¬partiality to enter into a critical examination of the objections and views of others bearing upon the subject. Such objections and answers are set forth as a part of the things desired to be expressed, thus affording others the opportunity of considering dif¬ferent views and opinions, so that they may be better enabled to arrive at a decision unaffected by a one-sided presentation:

OBJECTION NUMBER 1

It is claimed by some that there is a wonderful harmony of the three par¬ables found in Mat. 24:45-51; 25:1-13; and 25:14-30; that the three classes mentioned are one and the same. They claim that the class represented by the wise and faithful servant are the watching, waiting and faithful people of the Lord in the time of the end; that the “faithful and wise servant” are the same as the “wise virgins”, just as out of the class of the faithful and wise servant an evil servant class forms itself; so also a part of the virgins reveals itself as a foolish class.

It has already been expressed with proofs (to the satisfaction of some at least, it is hoped), that the wise and faithful servant is not a class, but an individual and that should dismiss the thought of "that servant" as being the "wise virgins" or those in the parable of the tal¬ents who were commended for faithfulness. It is, however, true that the characteristics of the wise virgin class and of the faithful, talented ones, were found in that faithful steward in superlative measure or he would not have received and maintained such an appointment of the Lord. In other words "that servant" was undoubtedly one of the wise virgins and, later, was found to be one of the "well done" servants.

It is nowhere shown in the parable of the "wise virgins" that they received appointments as rulers, or, as a class, to be a composite ruler, over the Master's "goods," and there seems to be no authority for any such thought. If "that servant" was a class and that class was the "wise virgins" of the parable, it would have to be admitted that the announcement "Behold the Bridegroom" was made by the "wise vir¬gins" to themselves, which, of course, is unreasonable. It seems more in keeping with the Scriptures and good reasoning to believe that the "cry" was first made by an individual in the early part of the Lord's Second Presence, which was done in the same way that John the Bap¬tist personally announced the presence of Jesus at His first Advent.

It is not our intention to consider in detail matters not di¬rectly connected with the subject in question. It might be said, however, that the three parables referred to represent three distinct pictures, the parable of the "faithful and wise servant" shows a divine requirement in knowledge and the proper application of it, wisdom, and also per¬sistency or continuance in well doing; the parable of the "wise and foolish virgins" shows prudence in forethought on the one hand and its lack on the other; the parable of the talents shows zeal and endea¬vor on the one hand and slothfulness and indifference on the other. All the good qualities mentioned must be possessed in some measure by all who would inherit the Kingdom of Heaven.


Concerning "the evil servant" class(?) there has already been much speculation, and we have no desire to add to it. It has always been a personal impression, however, that, on the face of the Lord's words on the subject, the fulfillment of that Scripture about "the evil servant" was made contingent upon something, namely, the falling away or unfaithfulness of "that servant"; so that if he (that ser¬vant) continued to be faithful and wise in believing and proclaiming the Lord's presence and otherwise discharging the duties which de¬volved upon him there would be no "evil servant" for the purposes of said Scripture, even though some would be found in opposition to the office and work of the Lord's faithful servant, and, indeed, of all His faithful people, as has always been the case. The words “But” and “if" in verse 48 of Mat. 24 and in Luke 12:45 seem to indicate such a contingency. Probably this might be taken more in the form of a warn¬ing, and to serve as an incentive to continued faithfulness on the part of "that servant," rather than a matter to be separately fulfilled. The other parable referred to in the objection above cited (the parable of the talents Mat. 25:14-30) is considered in the following objection.

OBJECTION NUMBER 2

It is claimed and stated by some that “that servant” comprises all the faithful servants of God, and the rulership mentioned with respect to that appointment is future as in the case of the parables of the talents.

Here again it is necessary to repeat the view that "that servant" does not comprise all faithful servants of God, but is one of such faithful servants. Considering the parable of the talents as a whole, it is evi¬dent that whereas this parable has had an application all the way down through the Gospel Age from the very beginning to the time of the Lord's Second Advent, when the reckoning was due, the parable in connection with the appointment of "that servant" applied only at the "end" of the age. This thought is supported by the fact that in the parable of the talents, the Master is said to have "called his servants and delivered unto them his goods"(note: not made "ruler" over all His goods as in the case of the watching faithful servant); and He, the Master, distributed such "goods" Himself, "according to every man's several ability," and went into a far country (evidently representing heaven itself), and returned "after a long time" (after the "heavens" had duly retained Him) and began a reckoning with His servants. The commendation and rulership mentioned in this parable suggest future approbation and reward by the Master for the faithful use of "talents" (God given qualities seen in natural abilities and means), but the rulership in the case of "that servant" means an immediate appoint-ment as special representative of God or overseer over the Master's "goods" during the present life, as already expressed; and for the faithful performance of duties and the proper use of his talents, he also must share the Master's commendatory words, "well done thou good and faithful servant." As a further reasoning unfavorable to the idea that the rulership of Mat. 24:45-47 is the same as in the parable of the talents it should be noticed that the Master said that such a watching, faithful one would be made "ruler over his household to give them meat in due season." Does this mean that a servant class will be placed over (whom or what?) in the Kingdom of glory to dispense to others their portion of meat in due time? Or is this thought of a servant class with future rulership another potion of the adversary's compound, intended to blind well-meaning people to simple truths?

OBJECTION NUMBER 3

It is claimed by many that ‘That servant’ is not an individual, because to have given one rulership over all the Lord's goods while in the flesh would mean that no further light than he had could be expected, (after he had gone) and, in fact, that he was inspired in his teachings, and free from error.

JESUS said that "that servant" would be placed over all His goods, which would seem to suggest that the one so appointed would be given a deep and comprehensive knowledge of the Plan of God as wrapped up in the Bible, and that he would serve the "household" from time to time accordingly. If the one so appointed has been correctly located and named herein, many persons know that he ministered faithfully for 40 years and left the earthly tabernacle in 1916. What has any one, or a "corporate" body, brought forth since then, to augment the truth pertaining to the Divine Plan for the salvation of the Church to glory realms and also in regard to "restitution" for the world of mankind? How many persons have been led into true consecration, as a result of further light, since 1916? Can anyone be sure that all that has been said and written by others since 1916 constitutes part of the Master's "goods?" What if someone at the present time had the necessary financial means and other earthly conveniences for issuing a new book, purporting to convey "light," on every spur of the mind, and circulate it all over the earth? Would such "works" nullify the appointment of a special individual servant of God in the end of the age, in accordance with the Master's words? Or make his work of labor and love null and void? Or cause the efforts of other servants, however commendable, to be placed on an official par with his ministry?

So far as we are aware the one mentioned herein as "that ser¬vant" never claimed to possess inspirational powers. His declarations in the hands of people emphatically prove to the contrary; neither did such a one claim absolute freedom from error on all details. Not-withstanding the genuineness of the appointment, it should be remem¬bered that the one so appointed had to tabernacle in the flesh until that which is perfect is come. He would, therefore, it is thought, be permitted to err in expressions on certain more or less unimportant things not, however, affecting the interests of New Creatures. It should also be remembered that even the inspired Apostle Paul was not sure about certain details, but expressed his own mind which might or might not have been the mind of the Lord—1 Cor. 7:6, 40. Of course the matter was not doctrinal! It should be recalled, too, that the Apostle Peter “was to be blamed," says the Apostle Paul. Does it not seem that in this objection (No. 3) there is a hidden suggestion of ambition to "shine", egotistically, in a position to which another has been assigned? Are not there many other places and ways in which the Lord's people can "shine for Jesus"?

OBJECTION NUMBER 4

It is claimed and stated that
"These `stars' or messengers (Rev. 1, 2 and 3) apply to a ministering class of teachers rather than to seven particular individuals, and that the words of commendation, as well as the rebukes and reproofs, are as applicable to the stars as to the Churches themselves . . . If the Common Version rendering `the Church of Laodicea' is the correct one, (and it is supported by many manuscripts) then," the claim continues, "we have a further support for applying the messenger of the Laodiceans to a rejected class instead of a faithful minister outside of Laodicea."

The teacher of this objection and those who endorse it claim further support therefore because the messages, according to the Common Ver¬sion rendering, were addressed unto the angels of the Churches; and also because of the use of the personal pronouns "thy" "thou" and "thee," as in the expression "I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot . . . I will spue thee out of my mouth."

This claim has had more consideration than any of the previous claims and objections because of its seeming plausibility. After due meditation and reasoning, the following comments are submitted for the consideration of others:—it will be observed that this view is in harmony with some already considered, respecting a servant class. Thoughts already expressed on this point will, therefore, apply here. This view is otherwise separate and distinct from the rest in that it contains a vision of an entirely opposite class, namely, "a rejected clergy class as the messenger of the Laodiceans instead of a faithful minister outside of Laodicea." In the portion of the Revelation under consideration it is observed that John was instructed to address messages to the "angels" of the seven Churches in the places mentioned. As the book is greatly symbolic all have agreed that it is necessary to leave the narrow application of the messages to the seven literal Churches, and consider the messages as being applicable to the Church in seven stages or periods from the beginning of its history. Each message would have its strict application to the period to which it belonged, according to the existing conditions; and at each stage or epoch of the Church, the appropriate message of commendation or reproof or both must be given in words or conduct, or both, in order that the Scriptures might be fulfilled in the broader sense. The question is; who would be the messenger in each case to carry out the divine requirements?

Again it is found necessary to take a retrospective view—this time into the unerring Word of God. There it is seen that God has always used the best characters He could find among men for communicating His messages or expressing His will to others. Accordingly, He used faithful Noah to warn a stiff-necked and sinful people of a coming flood, (Gen. 6: 8, 13); Abraham, when He would destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. (Gen. 18:17); Moses, to reprove rebellious and idolatrous Israel, (Deut. 9); Samuel, to reprove the people and the king (I Sam. 13:7-14) ; Elijah, to reprove and destroy the prophets of Baal, (1 Kings 18:21-40) : Daniel and all the other "holy prophets", to defy and rebuke worshippers of idols. Similarly, at the beginning of the Gospel Age, God used His servants, the Apostles, as His mouthpieces, to warn, encourage and to reprove; and, notwithstanding the very serious blow which the truth received after the Apostles fell asleep and particularly during the "Dark Ages," Jehovah has never been without a witness in the earth. History reveals the fact that in the midst of mountains of darkness, superstition and error God raised up faith¬ful teachers and pastors with flint-like characters to contend for the truth as they were permitted to see it, to reprove mere professors of Christianity, and to encourage the faithful and saintly ones scattered abroad in the earth. There is no reason to believe that God or His highly exalted Son would change that course of action in the end of this age and use an unfaithful "rejected class" for communicating the message of the Risen Lord to the Church of the Laodiceans. It would be beneath their dignity to do so. God would not use a rejected class to bear His message, for "unto the wicked, God saith, what hast thou to do, to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth? Seeing that thou hatest instruction, and vastest my words behind thee."—Ps. 50:16, 17. God's word or message, whether com¬mendatory or condemnatory, is always clean, perfect and pure, and those who would bear such messages must also be clean and pure (in heart at least), not a rejected or rejectable class. "Be ye clean that bear the vessels of the Lord," says the prophet Isaiah (52:11).

In view of the foregoing it seems clear that the "angels" or "stars" unto whom John in the vision was instructed to write were faithful servants of God, true light bearers, whose very lives would be consistent with their special offices for teaching, encouraging or rebuking as the circumstances demanded. It does not seem right to think of the messen¬gers as necessarily members in the unfaithful Church, sharers of its iniquities and reproofs. To the contrary, it seems that they (the messen¬gers) and all the faithful and loved ones of God existed in the vari¬ous epochs of the Church, but were not necessarily of the Church in her corrupt condition; in the same way that they are said to be in the world but not of it. Nor does the use of the expressions "unto the angel of the Church at Ephesus" etc., and of the personal pronouns "thy," "thou," and "thee," invalidate this thought. It seems that while the messages were intended for the Churches they were to be addressed to or "unto," or delivered "by" servants of God—the appointed channels.

It may be worthwhile to note the fact that the Emphatic Diaglott renders the word "by", instead of "unto"—"by" the angel, etc. Instead of sticking to the Common Version translation, in order to fur¬ther some preconceived idea, the Diaglott's translation could, with greater propriety, be accepted, as it seems to be in keeping with the reasonable and logical understanding of the matter.

It is not our intention to try to find out who were the messengers in the several stages of the Church. The subject under review concerns the present and not the past; therefore it is enough to endeavor to find out what is the condition of this stage of the Church, and who is the "angel" or "messenger" of the Church in Laodicea (the period of "justice for the people.") The con¬dition is as pointed out by the Master in Rev. 3:15-18 and elsewhere in the Scriptures, and the messenger is, in our mind, as already shown.

But let us assume that the burden of the message to the Laodicean Church rested upon a rejected clergy class as a duty to be discharged. In this the day of the Lord's judgment, when clergy and laity of vari¬ous religious persuasions are banding together, and their man-made systems rolling up "like a scroll" prior to the time for them to be broken in pieces finally, which group has summoned or will sum¬mon the courage to tell the others of their delinquencies? Is it not rather true that these so-called messengers in and of the Churches have been and are like the "watchmen" and "shepherds" described by the prophet Isaiah (56:10, 11)?


But, to the contrary, and as a verification of the findings already expressed concerning "that servant," is it not true that the said faithful messenger some 50 years ago, and since, informed "the Church" of its unfaithfulness and religious decline, its lukewarmness, boastings and deceptions? And did he not utter the Master's re¬bukes? Yea, verily! And many have heard and repented; perhaps some have not—Rev. 3:19; "Studies in the Scriptures," Vols. II, III and IV. (He did so also by oral proclamation, as attested by the mouths of several witnesses.)

Concerning the seven stars in the Savior’s right hand, it has been suggested by some to mean that "He (Christ) had the power to continue, if faithful or remove if unfaithful, these ministering servants of His, just as He had the power to remove the lamp stand (Churches) themselves, when they proved unfaithful." There can be no doubt that Christ has the power to do all things ; but the expression that Christ "had in his right hand seven stars" needs not be accompanied with "ifs." The stars in the Master's right hand seem to convey the thought of His loving care and protection of such messengers—that they would enjoy His favor and that He would particularly commission them. Is it conceivable that during the whole of the Church's history all of the "stars" in the Lord's right hand became unfaithful and found themselves as "a rejected clergy class"? This question must be answered in the affirmative for the sake of consistency, for if the messenger of the Laodiceans is a rejected clergy, the six previous messengers were also. But is it true?

OBJECTION NUMBER 5

It is claimed and stated that
"There is always danger of worshipping individ¬uals, and if one individual is `that servant' some would worship and enshrine him."

This objection is not based on any of the Scriptures in question, but somewhat on sentiment or knowledge of what is liable among men; but no one should allow sentiments or human possibilities to weigh against divine facts. Weak men have always been in danger of worshipping leaders; but it does not seem right to think that God would allow such a possibility to operate against the necessity for the appointment of a special servant in the end of the age, when so many other things of far greater importance, involving the majority, were to take place. All who have a reasonable knowledge of the Word of God, and are properly exercised thereby, know that God and His dear Son only are to be worshipped, and they seek to do so accordingly. They are admonished, however, to "know them which labor among you, and to esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake." And "let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labor in the word and doctrine." 1 Thess. 5-13; 1 Tim. 5:17.

May we not think that if persons would "worship" a servant as a leader, the same class would worship a "corporate body" if the persons forming it were individually pointed out as "that servant?"

The Apostle Paul found it necessary to rebuke some in his day for manifesting a tendency to hedge themselves around favorite lead¬ers, because of some little duty performed, or personal influence (1 Cor. 1:10-13). The same attitude has existed since the Apostles' day, and is largely responsible for the giant of sectarianism which has been born and reared in the Christian Church. It seems that many who have learned to denounce the wrong which existed in the early Church, and since, have become, or are becoming, victims of the misdeed. And it is somewhat strange to find that many dear ones who cynically attach fault to those who are conscientiously holding the truth in the love of it, — (recognizing both the Source and the instrument used in these "last days") —are guilty of fostering and manifesting the evil of blindly following leaders ! "Be ye fol¬lowers of Christ" is the Divine command. He is the worthy and infallible Guide in all things, including doctrines. In a picture, however, of an orderly procession, the sincere student sees Jesus as Leader; and, following Him, in line, are all who imbibe His spirit, hearken unto His precepts and teach His doctrines. If, in our endea¬vors to learn of and follow Jesus, we find a fellow-follower doing these things to the best of his ability, there can be no reasonable objec¬tion to following such a one. Indeed, in the picture, it would be but the proper thing to do; for, while the eyes should be fixed on Jesus, there is a measure of responsibility on the one hand, and de-pendence on the other, on the part of those who follow after Jesus in an orderly way. In this sense Timothy, who was a follower of Jesus, was exhorted to be "an example of the believers"—(1 Tim. 4:12). The Apostle Paul said "Be ye followers of me even as I also am of Christ"—1 Cor. 11:1. And the following, under such conditions, should be done with love and zeal and no less positive¬ness than that which should characterize a resistance of doctrines which do not come from Christ, the Leader.

OBJECTION NUMBER 6

It is claimed and stated by a few that
"A Mr. Barbour was really the one who was ‘watching' at the time when the Lord's return is supposed by some to have taken place."

This objection is both last and least. The fact that the Mr. Barbour did not bring forth the "meat" by which thousands of people have been kept spiritually alive during the past 100 years is sufficient to render him excluded from the office of "that servant," and to dismiss this flimsy objection as being unworthy of any further consideration.

IS IT NECESSARY TO KNOW WHO "THAT SER¬VANT" IS,
WHETHER AN INDIVIDUAL OR A FAITHFUL CLASS,
OR A REJECTED CLERGY CLASS?

Yes! Especially in these days when the activities of the evil one have been more pronounced than ever. The minds which have no knowledge, or are full of doubt, concerning God's special messenger in the end of the age, are open ground for the work of the adversary who will sooner or later fill such minds with things which appear true, but which cannot stand the acid test of the Divine Word. Such persons soon find themselves treating contemptuously, (as is already the case) the "work and labor of love" of such a faithful steward, or else place his ministry on a level with that of his contemporaries, other servants of God since, or with that of his later rivals.

As "itching ears" become more and more inclined towards fanciful interpretations of Scriptures, speculations and theological guesses, they correspondingly become less attuned to the sweet sounds of simple truths which fall like rich cadences upon ears which have been trained and kept trained. And alas! Many who once seemed to glory in things which are TRUE are now glorying in opposite things or in nothing at all! It should be remembered that all the way down the age some have presumed to be rival teachers, and people becoming intoxicated with false "wines," and with an ever-increasing desire for that which is not good, fell victims to ambitious priests and leaders. It is inter¬esting to note that in the very beginning of the Church's history—in the message to Ephesus—it was pointed out that some called themselves Apostles, but they were not; and at the end of the age some have de¬flected the truth and called themselves (and others call them) special servants and greater teachers of the Gospel than the instrument which God used in the closing scenes of the Church's career. But they are not!

If, since the close of 1916, meek and teachable people throughout the world have had a clearer insight into the general Plan of God—the Plan of the Ages, (Eph. 3:10, Diaglott)—than at any previous time since the days of the Apostles, (and it seems undoubtedly true), then such a fact seems to be among other good and Scriptural reasons for the views advanced by many students of the Bible that (1) the Second Presence of the Master has already taken place; (2) He has carried out His promise to serve the household of faith through a faithful and wise servant ; and that (3) the Kingdom which will bless all the families of the earth is near—even at the door.

MODESTY—A GEM

As it could hardly be expected that one would fill the office of "that servant" without having some real knowledge of the fact, we have been wondering whether there were any statements of such knowl¬edge in the extensive writings of such an one; and, having searched in the Harvest Message, it has been found that there have been statements to that effect, couched in language of marked modesty—without a tinge of ostentation or boastfulness—unlike the seemingly unrestrained efforts of natural-minded men. Those who have Tower Reprints, and would like to ascertain the facts, may do so by referring to '96, p. 47; '98, 74 77; '04, 122-126; '09, 278, 292-294; '10, 356, 357, 392;'14, 45-46; Vol. 4, p. 613.

"THE PATH OF THE JUST"

Some have made, and are making, frequent use of the text, "The path of the just is as a shining light that shineth more and more unto the perfect day," to justify the rejection of old light, which is, at least, inferred by their acceptance of teachings as "new light." Light is a symbol of truth and to reject old light means to reject old truth. Since the Scriptures do not authorize the rejection of old truth, is it not reasonable to think that the idea of "new light" is not of God? It is somewhat grievous to know that many dear people of God have become infatuated with a wrong influence and now manifest contempt for the light which they once held sacred, to the extent that they seem willing to destroy the precious books and other literature containing such light! Is some portion of the history of the "dark ages" repeating itself in this the dawn of the Kingdom of light and blessing?

Inasmuch as the text above quoted is so much used as a basis for discrediting the work of the one found to be "that servant" a word thereon will not be amiss: Picture before the mental vision one who is travelling amidst the gloom of night to a fair city, illuminated and bright. The way is not only dark, but beset with dangers on every hand, because of his need to carry a light from the very beginning of his journey. As he approaches nearer and nearer the city which reflects its light into the distance, he correspondingly observes increasing light; he gets a greater appreciation of the light itself; he sees himself better; there is a keener discernment of the dangers around, and a more heartfelt appreciation of the purpose of the light, because by it he is nearing his destination without harm. As he enters the city the excelling light there from absorbs that which had but feebly shone in comparison; he finds himself in a halo of entrancing light, and all that remains is an inherent appreciation of the light which he had from the beginning of his way, and grateful acknowledgement of the source from which it came.

At the very beginning of the course of those who are justified by faith—which course is through a world of darkness, so vast and dense that it "covers the earth and gross darkness the people," with foes and dangers on all sides—they must needs have the lamp of God's Word to guide them—"Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path." As they journey on to their perfect day—the day which will bring unspeakable bliss and perfect conditions for them—they do not throw away the light with which they started, but continue to use it. As they approach nearer and nearer to the perfect condition, and their "city," the light there from, as it were, connects up with the light of God's Word in their hearts, which caused them to rejoice at the very outset. As they ponder and muse upon the light, it shows increasing radiance. It is the same light magnified in hearts of apprecia¬tion by constant meditation and gratitude to God. And so they journey on, getting a greater appreciation of the great Source of Light ; their path becomes more and more clearly lit by the lamp of God's Word; they have greater ability to see themselves as dependents upon God, His Word (the light) and His grace; they get a keener discernment of the evils around and those which are approaching, and corresponding strength and courage to go on ; they finally come to the last stage of the way—through the portals of death—still holding the light—and eventually find themselves ushered into the "day" where there is LIGHT, and no "night." The light held sacred from the beginning, which was carried in "earthen vessels", is now merged in supernal bright¬ness to constitute the City of Light for the benefit of a sick world. Such is "the path of the just which shineth more and more unto the perfect day."

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Let no one hastily and wrongly suppose that this is an attempt to defend someone, for nothing is further from the writer's mind; and, the fact is, the one who has been pointed out herein as "that servant" NEEDS NO DEFENCE. Nor is it a challenge to any who dare to think differently. It is an honest and sincere expression of one's con¬viction after due meditation upon and examination of the Word of God and other facts and circumstances pertinent to the subject. The writer, therefore, hopes that this booklet will be read and considered in the spirit in which it is written—the spirit of a Berean.

Finally, it would, perhaps, not be amiss now to say that in view of what has been set forth foregoing, there seems to be no reason to place credence in the oft-repeated claim, since 1916, that a corporate body is the Divinely appointed channel of the Truth, but rather that "that servant" himself (Charles Taze Russell) was the Lord's Channel while the corporate body (the Society) was the willing medium that "that servant" chose to assist in the work' of distributing the Lord's food to the household which, in turn, needed to be fed.


Dear reader, if you have been convinced along the lines expressed herein, you have already found it necessary to "continue in the things which thou didst learn, and wast convinced of, knowing by whom thou hast been instructed." If the writer's view on the ques¬tion of "that servant" appeals to you, after reading, and you are satis¬fied that it is the truth on the subject, you will, doubtless, desire to encourage others who you think need to consider or reconsider the matter, to do so in the light of the Scriptures and pertinent facts. Let us always "examine all things and hold fast the good”; and, then, let us "be infants no longer, tossed and whirled about with every wind of that teaching which is in the trickery of men, by cunning craftiness in systematic deception." — 2 Tim. 3:14; 1 Thess. 5:21; Eph. 4:14--Diaglott.

___________

Return to INDEX