Chapters
EXODUS
EFFORTS AT DELIVERANCE
Ex. 5:1—7:13; 10:21-29
PHARAOH'S REACTIONS TO THE REQUEST FOR ISRAEL'S RELEASE. INCREASED OPPRESSION. THE OFFICERS' COURSE. MOSES', GOD'S AND ISRAEL'S RESPONSE. AN EPIPHANY GENEALOGY. MEASURES AND COUNTER MEASURES. NINTH PLAGUE. COMPROMISES REJECTED. PRIDE FALLS.
WE WILL begin this chapter with a study of Ex. 5. In it Pharaoh's course counteractive of the first works of Moses and Aaron for Israel's deliverance is set forth; and it types Satan's course counteractive of the first works of Jesus and the Church during the Parousia for the deliverance of the Church and the World. Moses' and Aaron's first going in to Pharaoh after their first dealings with Israel types Jesus' and the Church's first public efforts after their first private dealings with Spiritual Israel (v. 1). We are not to understand Moses' and Aaron's speaking with Pharaoh (v. 1) to type Jesus and the Church speaking directly to Satan as the one directly addressed; for the facts of the reaping time show that the Church made no address as Jesus' mouthpiece directly to Satan. How, then, was it done? In circulating the magazine, The Herald Of The Morning, in selling the book, The Three Worlds, in delivering lectures, in giving tracts and in speaking and writing letters to, and conversing with the public as citizens of Satan's empire, the Church as Christ's mouthpiece spoke to Satan, who was a close listener to the message delivered to his subjects; hence in reality he was the person mainly addressed by the message.
(2) In quoting and explaining the pertinent Scriptures in proof of their ambassadorship for the God of the Faithful and in proof of their message, Christ and the Church antityped Moses and Aaron saying, "Thus saith the Lord God of Israeli" (v. 1). In delivering
Exodus.
70
their message of salvation for the elect and non-elect, with ardent desire that its contents be realized, they antityped Moses and Aaron saying, "Let my people go." In declaring the securing of the blessed enjoyment of the high calling and restitution salvations (the feast of v. 1) as being the design of God in making the request for antitypical Israel's release, Jesus and the Church antityped the declaration that Moses and Aaron made as to the object of their request for Israel's release, "that they may hold a feast." In showing that the high calling and restitution salvations would be glorious, happy experiences, they antityped that part of the explanation of Moses and Aaron on the object of the release asked for—that it was for a festival purpose. In declaring that these salvations would result in glory to God in the highest they antityped Moses' and Aaron's statement that the feast was to be held to (for) the Lord. And in declaring that the antitypical feast was to be held in complete isolation and separation from Satan and his empire, they antityped Moses' and Aaron's saying that the feast was to be held in the wilderness. The fact that the request in the type was made in the name of the Lord God of Israel was to suggest the thought to Pharaoh's mind that whereas he was oppressing an apparently weak and meek nation, he was in reality oppressing the favorites of the Omnipotent, which fact was calculated to arouse a fair-minded person to a favorable response to the request. These same thoughts underlie the form of introducing the antitypical request—the quotation and explanation of pertinent Scriptures proving that Jehovah is antitypical Israel's covenant God.
(3) It will be noted that vs. 1-5 treat of the first appearance of Moses' and Aaron's many appearances before Pharaoh. This fact enables us to locate the time of its antitype. Remembering that Moses' arrival in Egypt types Jesus' Second Advent setting in, and Aaron's arrival there types the Church in the Second Advent time coming into the office of Jesus' mouthpiece,
Efforts at Deliverance.
71
and that their first work before the elders and the Israelites types Jesus' and the Church's first work in the Second Advent toward the leading and other brethren, we are enabled to see that their first appearance before Satan was in the first public work done in the Parousia—the first cry, "Behold the Bridegroom," from the Spring of 1877 to that of 1878 (Matt. 25:6). In a literary way this public work was done through (1) the magazine, The Herald Of The Morning, financed and largely directed by Bro. Russell, and edited by Bro. Barbour, assisted by Bros. Russell and Paton, (2) the small book, The Three Worlds, written by Mr. Barbour and financed by Bro. Russell, and (3) Bro. Russell's tract, The Object And Manner Of Our Lord's Return. This public work was further performed by lectures, the main lecturers—pilgrims—being Bros. Russell, Barbour, Paton, Keith, Mann, Rice, Jones and Adams. The book, The Three Worlds, was sold by pilgrims and sharpshooters, and the tract, The Object And Manner, etc., was circulated by pilgrims and volunteers. Thus on a small scale sharpshooter and volunteer work was entered into; and the pilgrim work was going on full fledged in this first public effort of the Harvest. It is this work that is typed by the statements of v. 1.
(4) Pharaoh's defiant answer (v. 2) was (1) a denial of God's attributes as sufficient to warrant His request of Pharaoh for Israel's release; (2) a refusal to recognize Him as God; and (3) a refusal to obey Him in His request. In this he types (1) Satan's denial of God's attributes as sufficient to warrant God's request of him to release God's people from his empire and slavery; (2) his refusal to recognize Him as God; and (3) his refusal to obey Him in His request. We are not to understand that Satan gave these answers to Jesus and the Church in so many words orally. Rather he did this by his acts, i.e., by using his human mouthpieces, especially the clergy, but also politicians and aristocrats, to speak these thoughts
Exodus.
72
in contradiction to the public message of God's mouthpieces from 1877 to 1878. The Faithful in their public work were proclaiming the ransom, the object, manner and time of our Lord's return, the election of the Church, restitution for the world, future probation, the overthrow of Satan's empire—and all as an outflow of God's perfect wisdom, power, justice and love; and incidentally they refuted the opposing errors, like self-atonement, Christ's return in the flesh to destroy the universe, to save the saintly only, to damn the wicked, body and soul, at some unknown date far in the future, Calvinistic predestinarianism, eternal torment, the consciousness of the dead, saints' entering into their reward immediately at death, judgment day as doomsday, the Divine right of the clergy, kings and aristocrats, etc. It was such preaching with an ardent desire for its fulfilment that constituted the request, "Let my people go." The clergy, the politicians and aristocrats and their partisan supporters by contradicting these truths and presenting their pertinent errors contradictory of these truths (1) denied that God's attributes were such as to warrant a change of view and resultant acts, such as were proclaimed and desired by the Faithful. Their contradictory course was (2) a refusal to recognize Jehovah as a God of perfect wisdom, justice, love and power. Their contradictory course was (3) a refusal to liberate God's people from the errors, oppression and violence in which they were held. To such a course of contradiction they added such obstructive acts as they could to hinder the freedom of God's people. But in all this they did not act independently as of their own initiative. Satan inspired their thoughts, egged them on to their contradictions and made it profitable for, and defensive against loss to, them to pursue the thwarting course that they took. Hence it was really Satan (1) who denied God's attributes as sufficient to warrant His request of him for antitypical Israel's release; (2) who refused to recognize Him as God,
Efforts at Deliverance.
73
and (3) who refused to obey Him in His request. And in so doing Satan antityped Pharaoh's answer.
(5) These Satanic contradictions and obstructions set in immediately after Satan's mouthpieces caught the drift of the first public message of the Parousia; and Satan was a Johnny-on-the-spot to give them a quick understanding of the message's import; for it was not a new thing to him, since he first heard it at the mouth of Jesus, the Apostles and the Apostolic Church; and though he had suppressed and misrepresented it for centuries in the meantime, he was compelled between 1872 and 1877 to hear it again unfolding as it was given privately to the Lord's people, first as a new work from 1872 to 1874, and then as a developed work from Oct., 1874, to April, 1877. But such contradictory and obstructive tactics did not stop the messengers. Rather it stimulated them to renewed efforts; and these renewed efforts are typed by the repeated and elaborated request of v. 3. The word to meet (v. 3) in such connections carries the force of revealing oneself (Ex. 4:24; Num. 23:3, 4, 15, 16). These words, "the God of the Hebrews hath met with us," antitypically do not imply that the Church was inspired by Jehovah, but that they were illuminated as to His mind expressed in the Bible and explained to them. They antityped this statement by proving their views to be Scriptural, reasonable and factual. The politeness with which the request was made in the type antitypes the graciousness of the spirit of the Church in proclaiming publicly the glad tidings of the true gospel. Moses' and Aaron's statement of the request in v. 3 is the fulfilment of the Lord's pertinent charge (Ex. 3:18); and as the antitypes were given under that verse we need not repeat them here. The reason given by Moses and Aaron for the request, "lest He fall upon us with pestilence, or with the sword," is a new item. The thought of the type is clear. It types how graciously and apologetically self-preservation was given as a reason for the antitypical request; for if antitypical
Exodus.
74
Israel would not undertake and persevere in the involved spiritual journey, consecration made and carried out, it is certain that the Lord would send to them a strong delusion—a symbolic pestilence (2 Thes. 2:9-12)—as He has done and is doing to the unfaithful from 1878 onward in the six harvest siftings. The antitypical sword of v. 3 represents controversial Truth refuting the errors of the unfaithful. This, too, has been enacted since 1878 toward the unfaithful antitypical Israelites. These are not noted in the type, which treats of the real Israelites only.
(6) Pharaoh's rebuking Moses and Aaron for arousing the desire of liberty in the Israelites' hearts (v. 4) types Satan's rebuking Jesus and the Church for arousing in antitypical Israel's hearts the desire of freedom from sin, error, selfishness, worldliness and death. Such desire in Israel, making them labor less, types the desire of antitypical Israel freeing it measurably from the oppression of sin, error, selfishness, worldliness and death. In the antitype this is wrought through repentance, faith, justification, consecration and their faithful performance. This, of course, hindered the progress of the curse in them, just as Israel's being partly relieved of their work freed them from oppressive labor. And as these effects were the respective fruits of the labors of the two Moseses and Aarons, so Pharaoh and Satan were angry at, and rebuked the respective Moseses and Aarons. Pharaoh's charging Moses and Aaron to perform slaves' work (v. 4) types Satan's efforts to subject Jesus and the Church to sin, error, selfishness; worldliness and death, which he attempted throughout the Harvest, especially in the six siftings. As Pharaoh blamed Moses and Aaron (v. 5) with the responsibility of deterring many from labor, some of whom were oppressed Egyptians and others of whom were oppressed members of other nations, who caught the spirit of liberty proclaimed by Moses and Aaron, and who later actually left Egypt with the Israelites (Ex. 12:38; Num. 11:4); so Satan blamed
Efforts at Deliverance.
75
Jesus and the Church with the responsibility of relieving from many effects of the curse antitypical Israelites and some who were not antitypical Israelites, but who longed for liberty from its oppression, they mingling among God's people. This rebuke came from Satan through his special servants in church, state and capital, who, apprehensively observing the spirit of liberty from the curse proclaimed worldwide and being received by many, rebuked by their contradictory teachings and obstructive tactics the Church, and thereby Jesus, for fostering such a spirit by their public message of "liberty to the land and to the inhabitants thereof," as well as to the Church before the world of mankind.
(7) Vs. 6-9 show the counteractive measures that Pharaoh took to hinder Israel's obtaining their freedom. He would remedy the situation from his standpoint by increasing the burdens of the people and thus make them work more, that by harder labor he might drive out of them the alleged folly of aspiring to liberty, when they would be made to feel that such aspirations only increased their burdens. So Satan, while protesting through his clerical, political and aristocratical mouthpieces against the message of Christ and the Church given from April, 1877, to April, 1878, on liberty from the curse through the two salvations, also set into operation counteractive measures calculated to wear out the desire for freedom from the curse in those who were more or less animated by selfishness, by which Satan supposed all to be animated, and thus to withhold them from seeking release from the oppression of sin, error, selfishness, worldliness and death, in the desire for a mere amelioration of their increased burdens. It is written, "Jordan overfloweth all his banks all the time of harvest" (Josh. 3:15), i.e., during the entire time of the Jewish, Gospel and Millennial Harvests, the curse of sin, error and death overflows in great increase above other times. The history of the Jewish Harvest proves this. We are eye
Exodus.
76
witnesses of this fact as taking place since 1874, and Scripturally, know that we will continue to witness it until 1954-1956. More particularly and aboundingly is this true during the present Harvest, with which the type under study is concerned. Shortly we will give some particulars thereon.
(8) The antitypical taskmasters of v. 6 are sin, error, selfishness, worldliness and death; and the officers of the people are the reformer class among God's nominal people, who, while seeking to stay some features of the curse, more or less enforce others (see vs. 10-21). As examples of such reformers we might mention in the political world: Gladstone, Liebknecht, Mussolini, Tolstoy, Lenine, Debs, Bryan, (Ramsey) MacDonald; in the moral world: Comstock, (Francis) Murphy, (Frances) Willard; in the religious world: Doellinger, Moody, Sunday, (Gypsy) Smith, (Sam) Jones, Farrar, (Arthur) Pearson; in the capitalistic world: (Ida) Tarbell, (Thomas) Lawson and other muckrakers. While all of these sought in their various fields to stay certain effects of the curse, they undoubtedly led the people into other features of it and thus were used by Satan to oppress the people. Satan's counteractive measures began in 1877, as the statement of the type (v. 6—"the same day") and the facts of the antitype prove; but we are not to understand that such oppression ceased when the next public work set in. Rather throughout the harvest such a policy is followed by Satan. This feature as peculiar in successive antitypes and symbols, as running on to a completion, we can see well illustrated in Elijah's smiting Jordan, his and Elisha's crossing it, their walking and talking on the other side, in the pouring out of the seven vials, etc., etc. We are not to understand that each vial ceased to be poured out any longer after the next one was begun to be poured out; for the facts show that each volume continued by its refutations to plague those whom it refuted, despite new ones joining the refutative work. This peculiarity,
Efforts at Deliverance.
77
of course, does not show in the typical plagues, nor in the symbolization of their antitypes in Rev. 16, nor in types in general. Yet this is the way the fulfillments of practically all successive types and symbols occur. Hence we will not need in our study to mention this fact every time it occurs, which is frequent.
(9) Pharaoh's (vs. 7-9) charging the taskmasters and officers to make the people deliver the same number of bricks and provide their own straw for them, which previously they did not have to do, and thus greatly to increase their burdens, types Satan's manipulating the forms of the curse and the reformers in such ways so as to increase the curse. In the political, industrial and financial world he began this by making the gold standard oppress the peoples, especially in America, and increased this oppression by tinkering with reform measures, like the Bland-Allison Act of 1878 and the Sherman Purchasing Act of 1890, and by securely fastening the gold standard on the nations indebted to Britain and the silver standard on some non-debtor nations purchasing from England. The resultant oppression on the farmers of the world and on the silver standard countries of the world is known to everybody. The farmers in India and China are now among other causes groaning under this condition. Retributively Britain is now suffering as a result. The Russo-Turkey war of 1877 and 1878, the European alliances, the tariff walls of Europe and America, are other exhibitions of this increased oppression in the political world at that time, the reformers as a sum total of their efforts only making the situation worse, as America's experience with prohibition and as Europe's experience with republicanism, socialism, communism, totalitarianism, anarchism and syndicalism prove. In the religious world this oppression has been working especially since 1878 in the six great siftings among the consecrated, the justified and the mere professors, the reformers' creed-revising efforts resulting in adding more fuel to the religious fires.
Exodus.
78
(10) Certainly the facts prove that "Jordan overfloweth all his banks all the time of harvest," so far as the present Harvest is concerned. Never was vice in the form of white slavery, adultery, fornication, unnatural sins, drunkenness, gluttony, bootlegging and gang lawlessness so rampant as since 1877. Never did poverty pinch so many as since 1877, especially since 1914. Never has education been more abused, depraved and emasculated than since 1877. In statecraft the following are some of the increases of the curse since 1877: land and market hunger, protecting the rich as against the poor, judicial, executive and legislative corruption in office and elections, the spoils system, boss rule, graft, land frauds, squandering public funds, using office for personal gain, militarism, crooked diplomacy, reducing solemn treaties to scraps of paper, the rule of might as against right, oppressing weak nations, unjust wars, imposing ruinous reparations on the defeated, land and people grabbing, debt repudiations, fomenting wars and revolutions, disregard of law and order, class legislation, heavy taxation, etc., etc., etc. In the financial and industrial world the following evils have either come into existence or greatly increased since 1877: stock gambling, watering, manipulating and defrauding, legal technicalities, miscarriages and delays, price manipulating, profiteering, monopolizing natural products by the few to the exploitation of the many, destroying competition and competitors, substituting inferior materials, using false weights and measures, adulterating foods, materials, etc., controlling and subsidizing the press, landlordism, so-called efficiency methods, dishonesty in bank and trust officials, dishonest book-keeping, bribery for special privileges, tax dodging, escape from punishment or from large punishment by rich and great, and unmerciful sentences on poor and small criminals, unauthorized use and peculation of trust funds, insurance company frauds, railroad crookedness, trust abuses, luxurious living in the face of
Efforts at Deliverance.
79
widespread want, wars of financiers, dissipation of wealth, buying elections, manufacturing panics and wars for financial gain, etc., etc., etc. In the world of labor the following occur: class hatred, labor union dictation to capitalists and laborers, unjustifiable strikes and lockouts, unjust boycotts, riots, pitched battles between capital's hirelings, strike breakers, and strikers, terrorism, incendiarism, sabotage, etc. The following from the pen of Mr. F. Simonds, the historian, describes certain present evil conditions:
"Seventeen years [since 1914] of almost continuous conflict, interrupted only by incomplete truce, have reduced the whole (European) continent to a state of economic and social disorder unparalleled since the Thirty Years' War. Nations are bankrupt, trade is reduced to barter, money has lost its value, even the pound sterling has faltered. The unemployed millions are meagerly fed by public treasuries, themselves inadequately filled by taxation which is extortionate. The miseries of the so-called peace of today, miseries reaching to every human being within national limits, defy exaggeration. It is clear that what has been going on since 1914 cannot continue."
Surely these facts show the increase of the curse in the political, business and labor world since 1877.
(11) The same is true in family life, as the following facts show: marital thoughtlessness, selfishness, oppression, disobedience, disrespect, unhappiness, infidelity, contentiousness, hatred, etc., the divorce evil, parental irresponsibility for, neglect of, indifference to, non-support of, and non- or mistraining of children, filial disrespect, lovelessness, disobedience, breaking up of the home life of families, casting old parents adrift unprovided for, etc. In the religious world the curse of erroneous doctrines and practices has greatly increased since 1877, as the following facts will prove: the spread of no-ransomism in the forms of direct ransom denials, self-atonement, works justification, Christian Science, Spiritism, evolutionism, the spread
Exodus.
80
of infidelism in the forms of universalistic self-atonement, rationalism, higher criticism, materialism, atheism, agnosticism, pantheism, deism, polytheism, increased fanatical sectism, the spread of combinationism, in sectarianism, in Protestantism, in Catholicism and Protestantism, in Churchianity with heathenism and Reformed Judaism, materialism, fadism, faith cureism, occultism, pseudo-science, secularism, the increase of thwarted reformism in the forms of prohibition of liquors, tobacco and narcotics, in the family relations, politics, industry, capital, social conditions, etc., the spread of contradictionism against the teachings of God's priesthood, especially in almost all matters connected with the two salvations, and finally the spread of revolutionism against the teachings and arrangements of God among the consecrated, the justified and the mere professors. In what is called "society" the caste feeling, the ostentatiousness, the luxury, the pride, the formality, the rivalry, the envy, the spite, the indifference to the needy, the emptiness, the aimlessness, the vanity, the selfishness and the laziness of it all, ever increasing, manifest Satan's oppression. All these facts prove that Satan has greatly increased the oppression of the curse since 1877 to counteract the Second Advent work of Jesus and the Church in its relation to the deliverance of the world from Satan's clutches. These he began according to the type (vs. 6-12) in 1877 and intensified increasingly ever since. He has been accomplishing this oppression by appealing to the selfishness of certain persons whose self interests make it profitable to them to do these evil things. Thus he makes it profitable to some—antitypical Egyptians, his servants—to oppress others. He has made conditions among men to conduce to such evils. Thus he is the real oppressor, however much secondary agents act.
(12) Pharaoh's claim (v. 8) that the Israelites were lazy types Satan's claim that people want too easy a time in desiring release from his bondage and in desiring
Efforts at Deliverance.
81
the liberty that service of God gives. Pharaoh's heartless cruelty in commanding the taskmasters and officers to crush the Israelites by more and prostrating work (v. 9) types Satan's charge to increase the woes that sin, error, selfishness, worldliness, the dying process and the number going into the death state bring upon the people. The antitypical taskmasters were commanded so to do by Satan's direct mustering of them for this diabolical work (Heb. 2:15); and the reformers (officers of the people) were commanded to do this by circumstances which Satan wrought in their lives, in several ways: (1) by designedly getting them to advocate what to the conservatives seemed radical and very selfish, and then by appealing to the self-interests of the conservatives bringing the reform efforts to naught, e.g., Mr. Bryan's bimetalism advocacy, etc.; (2) by getting them more or less to compromise their reform principles and practices for the sake of practical exigencies—expediency—which likewise increased the woes of the curse; (3) by making it more or less advantageous to some of them to drop their reform agitation; (4) by putting them into such positions as lured them on by more or less selfish considerations to differ from one another; (5) by giving them some slight success when it had to be conceded; and (6) especially by constant suggestions, internal and external, appealing to their desires to pursue a course that he wanted them to take. Pharaoh's charge (v. 9) that the taskmasters and officers dissuade the people from listening to vain (literally, deceitful) words, which by insinuation he charged Moses' and Aaron's propaganda were, types Satan's charge that the especial three features of the curse (sin, error and death) and the reformer leaders of the people by acts and teachings seek to refute, as erroneous, impractical, unfactual, unreasonable and unscriptural, the Parousia and Epiphany teachings of Jesus and the Church on freeing God's people from Satanic rule and oppression forever.
Exodus.
82
(13) The going forth of the taskmasters and officers of the people types the procedure of Satan whereby he initiated the first start of the added oppression. Their speaking to the people types, not words, but oppressive acts ("acts speak louder than words") whereby the added oppression was brought to the attention of antitypical Israel, e.g., the single gold standard in 1877, first beginning to make itself oppressively felt, was a speaking of the added oppression by the five forms of the curse as the antitypical taskmasters, while the reformers began to agitate palliative measures, starting in 1877, immediately after the oppression began to make itself felt, which expressed themselves legally in 1878 in the Bland-Allison Act. An example of this in the religious world is the antitypical taskmaster, error, initiating ante-millennial and post-millennial movements in the more conservative nominal churches, and in the more liberal of the nominal churches a pre-millennial movement that advocated Christ's return in the flesh to set up a kingdom for the blessing of the then living only. Similarly intentioned measures were introduced as to vice, society, state, nominal church, family, etc. The taskmasters' and officers' saying, "Thus saith Pharaoh" (v. 10), types that the curse features and the reformers by their acts showed that the real source of their endeavors was Satan and an acting out of Satan's principles. The statement (v. 10), "I will give you no more straw," types how the pertinent acts declared that the former relative leniency of the curse would no longer be allowed. Their charge to the people (v. 11), "Go, get your straw where you can find it," types their acts that pressed the people on into deeper and heavier oppression. The statement (v. 11), "Yet not ought of your work shall be diminished," types the acts whereby these showed that none of the past oppressive features of the curse—sin, error, selfishness, worldliness and death—would be taken away. Hence Satan's purpose was to continue to act as the one who
Efforts at Deliverance.
83
had the power of death in the application of former methods of executing the curse and adding others.
(14) The straw-gathering scattering of the people throughout Egypt (v. 12) types the spreading throughout the present evil world of the increased rigor of the curse during the Parousia and Epiphany and the affecting of all God's people with these added afflictions. The people seeking stubble (v. 12) instead of straw, which the owners would refuse to give, stubble thus being easier for them to get than straw, represents how the increasingly oppressed have been grasping at palliative measures, which, while increasing the evils of the curse beyond what they were before the Harvest, promised some measure of relief from the worse threatening evils pressing in on all sides. The task masters' hastening the people (v. 13) types the speeding up of the curse, which certainly since 1877 has been increasingly going on. This is evident in the increasingly great rush of evils in state, church (nominal), family, finance, industry, commerce, society, the underworld, transportation, agriculture, labor, radicalism, education, science, militarism, pacifism, efficiency methods, etc., etc., etc. The ruthless and unceasing sway of abounding selfishness on all sides, speaking louder than words, demands of the people that they undergo to the full—to the last ounce ("Fulfill your works, your daily tasks, etc."—v. 12), the increasing forms and rigors of the curse in addition to those of its forms existing before the Harvest and up to 1877. And in these added forms of the increased curse each aggravates the other. Thus sin, error and death increase one another and each separately in itself increases. The beating of the officers (v. 14) types the afflicting of the reformers by selfishness, worldliness, sin, error and death. The vilification of, and opposition to, such reformers as Lawson, Bryan, La Follette, Willard, Comstock, Wheeler and McBride in the financial, political and moral world; as Mitchell, Gompers, Murray and Greener the
Exodus.
84
trades-union world; as Debs, MacDonald, Liebknecht, Tolstoy, etc., in the socialist world, exemplifies how sin in others beat the reformers. Their own errors made them go astray in damaging mistakes and harried them in most cases to untimely graves. Thus were the antitypical officers beaten. Satan's traitorously turning the middle against the ends is illustrated in these cases—himself by the five forms of the curse, as the antitypical taskmasters, beating the officers that he had put over the people to oppress them even to an extremity.
(15) The taskmasters' demanding (v. 14) from the overseers the reason why they had not as formerly delivered yesterday and today the required number of bricks types how the acts of the curse rebuked the reformers for not themselves having suffered enough oppression, as well as for not having oppressed the people of God enough, which resulted from their reformatory efforts tending to relieve the people from a measure of the curse. The yesterday refers to the time of the Israelites' ceasing to labor so hard after the first message went out, beginning at 1874 and lasting to April, 1877. The today refers to the time following April, 1877; for we are to remember that the picture goes on to a completion, even to the end of the Epiphany. The sufferings of the reformers have been moving them to more strenuous and concerted public efforts to put aside the evils of the curse, each group fighting its own particular choice of evils to be antagonized. These more strenuous and concerted public acts are typed by the officers of the people complaining to Pharaoh (vs. 15-18) of their being mistreated, of the ill success that they have had and of the sufferings imposed upon them by evil opponents, whose sins, selfishness, worldliness and errors, as well as those of the reformers themselves, have been afflicting the latter, grinding them down in the death process. Their sufferings under the aggravated forms of the curse speak as acts in antitype of the officers' complaining that while the straw was withheld (v. 16) from them
Efforts at Deliverance.
85
and their underlings, they and their underlings had to make as many bricks as when straw was provided.
(16) From the accusation of the taskmasters in v. 14 and from the officers' statements in v. 15, we infer that the superintendents of the slaving Israelites had, in addition to overseeing the slaves, themselves to make bricks; and this certainly is apparent in the antitype; for not only the reformer leaders have had the work of supervising God's selfishness-worldliness-sin-error and death oppressed people, but themselves have had to undergo oppression from these antitypical taskmasters. The enacted protests, often coupled with words, against these antitypical oppressions antitype the officers' question put to Pharaoh, "Wherefore dealest thou thus with thy servants?" The statement, "Thy servants are beaten," typed the factual and verbal protests against the oppression that others and their own sins, errors and dying processes brought upon the reformers. Mr. Bryan's verbal and factual protest against the oppression coming from the mistreatment that Mr. Darrow's sinfulness and errors brought upon him during the Dayton, Tenn., evolution trial in 1925, culminating in his actual death, is an example of such antitypical protests. The officers' laying the fault at the doors of Pharaoh's people, especially his taskmasters (v. 16), types the reformers by public word and act laying the fault on the antitypical Egyptians, particularly on sin, error and death, as these acted through the antitypical Egyptians. It is these efforts of the officers to get relief for Israel that enabled us to see that they type the reformers.
(17) Pharaoh's answer (vs. 17, 18) means, type and antitype, the same as we saw above when considering vs. 7, 8, which he here reiterates, except his repeating the word "idle" serves to intensify the thought typically and antitypically. Hence further explanation on these verses is not needed. Of course, as in vs. 7, 8, he gave the answer in acts, not words. The officers' recognizing (v. 19) their evil plight types that
Exodus.
86
the reformers after many bitterly disappointing experiences have been recognizing the futility of their reform efforts, yea, the more than futility of these, since their best efforts have only led to worse abuses. This is clearly seen in the world financial situation and prohibition in the North, where bootlegging worked worse havoc than the saloon with many, especially with the youth. The second half of v. 19 being a repetition of the second half of v. 11, we will not repeat the explanation here, but refer the brethren to the comments given above on v. 11. As after their interview with Pharaoh the overseers met the waiting Moses and Aaron, so after each general reform effort and its failure (as the antitype of the interview with Pharaoh) the reformers came into contact with the awaiting Jesus and the awaiting Church, i.e., an exchange of ideas between the reformers and Jesus and the Church, Jesus speaking through the Church, took place. We have a splendid illustration of this in 1897, after Mr. Bryan was defeated in his reformer efforts in connection with the free coinage of silver, in his 1896 presidential campaign, when Jesus and the Church in "The Cries of the Reapers" chapter of Vol. 4, which appeared in 1897, met him. In fact that chapter, appearing as a Tower (Oct. 1, 1896; No. 19 Tower Extra), was circulated to the extent of 100,000 copies by the Democratic National Committee, as a part of their campaign literature in favor of Mr. Bryan's stand. But its forecasting from James 5:1-8 the failure of his efforts, made him and others feel that it injured his cause; and their disappointment made them act out a blaming of the Lord and the true Church (v. 21) for increasing the evil.
(18) The officers' wish (v. 21) that Jehovah would enter into examination and judgment of Moses and Aaron as mischief-makers, stirring up Pharaoh and his servants against them, types the reformers in their capacity of regarding the Church, while acting in reality as Jesus' mouthpiece, as a mischief-maker, and
Efforts at Deliverance.
87
denouncing it as injuring the cause of reform, by raising up evil opponents and conditions against their reform work, longing and praying for God to enter into examination and judgment against what was in reality God's Christ. These reformers, being cocksure that they were in the right, could regard what was really God's Christ as enemies of righteousness, against whom they felt justified in praying by longing acts God's curse! What a warning example against cock-sureness and self-opinionatedness! How manifestly apparent do the reformers stand here revealed as longers for popularity ("caused our savor to be abhorred"), even with the wicked! Unpopularity with the wicked rightly should be regarded as a decoration for meritorious service bestowed by the approving Jehovah on those faithful to His cause. Many have wondered why these reformers did not come into the Truth. V. 21, showing that they have been timeservers, trimmers, panters after popularity, even with the wicked, proves that they have lacked the necessary humility, hunger, meekness, honesty, goodness, reverence and holiness. Surely here again we see that all is not diamond that sparkles. The officers' saying that Moses and Aaron had put a sword into the hands of Pharaoh and his servants to slay them, types the reformers by word and act declaring that what was really Christ and the Church were giving their oppressors arguments refutative of their positions. The case of Mr. Bryan cited above is to the point. Our refusing to engage in slum, conversionist, prohibition, social uplift, good citizenship, etc., works, combined with our pointing out the difference of our mission, the relative futility of reform work now, and the kingdom as the only cure for present evils, and giving our time and strength to the Lord's work, the reformers have regarded as putting arguments against them into hands of the devil and wicked men, to their refutation.
(19) Moses' returning (v. 22) to the Lord with a report of apparent failure types our Lord rehearsing
Exodus.
88
before God the fact that the public efforts seemed to be unfruitful. Moses' sorrow over the situation as having been made worse for God's people, by his Divinely-commissioned work to obtain their release, effecting so far the reverse from what was desired and intended, types our Lord's sympathizing heart sorrowing over the temporarily worse condition of God's people occasioned by His Divinely-commissioned work of seeking to effect their release seemingly making the situation worse instead of the desired and intended bettered condition. Our Lord's sympathetic sorrow, not His words, spoke to Jehovah the antitype of Moses' questions and statements of vs. 22 and 23. Despite the fact that both Moses and Jesus had been forewarned of initial ill success with Pharaoh (Ex. 3:19, 20; 4:21-23), their deep love for, and sympathy with God's people made them very sad at their increased oppression. Vs. 22, 23, manifest to us the deep love for, and sympathy with God's typical and antitypical oppressed people, felt respectively by the typical and antitypical Moses. For ourselves there is much comfort in the thought that we have a sympathizing High Priest and Leader, who is not untouched by the feeling of our infirmities (Heb. 2:17, 18; 4:14, 15). The love and sympathy that our Lord learned as respects us in the days of His flesh still abide with Him and qualify Him to be a High Priest suitable to us in our need (Heb. 5:7-9). These considerations should cooperate with others to keep us from fainting (Heb. 12:3), and prompt us with assurance to come to the throne of grace to obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need (Heb. 4:16), "seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for us" (Heb. 7:25), even as this is typically shown in vs. 22, 23. Both the typical and antitypical Moses show how hard it is for the best of beings to bear without sorrow a much desired hope deferred—"Neither hast Thou delivered Thy people at all." From vs. 22 and 23 we may well learn the lessons of
Efforts at Deliverance.
89
sympathy, love, desire for practical results for efforts put forth, expectation of temporary reverses, patience amid hope deferred, prayer for the Lord's work, confidence in telling God all our heart's holy sentiments and confidence in, and use of our Lord's High-priestly ministry on our behalf for our development.
(20) We now come to the study of Ex. 6. The last two verses of Ex. 5 presented to our attention how Moses (and Christ) were pained over the increased oppression of the people resulting from their first efforts at their deliverance; and Ex. 6:1-13 shows God's response in the way of encouraging His typical and antitypical Messengers. If Pharaoh thought that he could cope with the God of Israel, he was to learn differently by bitter experience, typical of Satan's thinking that he could cope with the God of antitypical Israel, yea of the whole universe, and learning by experience otherwise. The typical encouragement that God offered to Moses (v. 1) represents the encouragement that God offered our Lord in His sympathetic concern over the increased severity of the curse inaugurated by Satan to offset our Lord's first efforts at delivering antitypical Israel. Did Pharaoh and Satan set into operation counteractive measures? God would set into operation against them measures more effective by far, both in the type and the antitype. ("Now shalt thou see what I will do to Pharaoh!") As Moses did not know in advance all the details of God's measures to be undertaken against Pharaoh ("Now shalt thou see"), so our Lord before His Second Advent was not by God given to know all the details of God's measures to be undertaken against Satan during our Lord's Parousia and Epiphany. As many of these were left over for explanation to Moses until after he would come into the actual work of effecting Israel's release, and that as they were about due to be put into execution, so many of the details that our Lord was to work out during His Second Advent mission were withheld from His knowledge until it was about time to put them
Exodus.
90
into execution. Hence His sorrow over antitypical Israel's increased suffering from the aggravated curse, as it was manipulated by Satan, was removed by Jehovah's revealing to Him how He would overcome Satan's oppositional measures and force him by the exhibition of great power ("a strong hand"; v. 1) not only to let them go, but to do it so emphatically as to drive them out of his domain of darkness, even as in the type not only did Pharaoh let Israel go, but in his anxiety to get rid of such trouble-occasioning slaves, he thrust them out in his desire to rid himself and his people from such as had so plaguesome a God as Israel's God had proven Himself to be to stubborn Pharaoh and his people.
(21) The repetition of thought in v. 2, found in the expression, "God spake unto Moses, and said unto him," is intended for the sake of emphasis, and the thing said certainly deserved emphasis: "I am Jehovah." This types how God, after assuring Jesus (in v. 1) that He would force Satan to accede to Jehovah's will in the matter of the deliverance of God's people, emphasized the thought very markedly by His language—language that was appropriately emphatic because of what it was to introduce. God's saying to Moses, "I am Jehovah," types that God assured Jesus by His attributes of being and character that He would see to it that the deliverance would follow in due course; for He thereby pledged Himself in all that He was and could do to effect His purpose. God's contrasting the revelation of Himself (v. 3) to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob merely as the Almighty, with the revelation of Himself to Moses as the self-existing God of perfect character, types God's contrasting the factual revelation of Himself in His love, to Jesus and the Church in the Jewish Harvest as the Almighty, with the factual revelation of Himself to Himself in His love and to Jesus and the Church as the self-existent God of perfect wisdom, justice, love and power, during the Parousia and Epiphany. There is a marked difference in the two
Efforts at Deliverance.
91
factual revelations of the two Harvests. While in the Jewish Harvest it was more God's power that revealed itself as acting in His factual revelation of Himself, as, e.g., this is shown in the first living creature, which was power, calling "Come," at the opening of the first seal (Rev. 6:1; compare with vs. 3, 5, 7 and Rev. 4:6, 7); in the Gospel Harvest all of God's attributes of being and character (Jehovah) are factually revealed as working coordinately unto a triumphant conclusion of God's Gospel-Age purpose, with greater emphasis than was given in the factual revelation of the Jewish Harvest. How much more gloriously does God's wisdom shine (and will yet even more gloriously shine as the Epiphany unfolds) in the greater amount of factual light of this Harvest compared with that of the Jewish Harvest! The same is manifest of His justice, power and love, as these shine in the greater works of this Second Advent period, contrasted with those of the First Advent period. This is why the factual revelations that the Jewish Harvest made of God can be spoken of as exhibiting to God in His love and to Jesus and the Church the inferior conception underlying the expression God Almighty, while the factual revelations of the Parousia and Epiphany rightly make Him manifest Himself to Himself in His love and to Jesus and the Church as the self-existent God of perfect wisdom, justice, love and power. For details on the name Jehovah, as it is set forth in this verse, we refer our readers to the discussion thereon of Ex. 3:13-15 in the preceding chapter.
(22) The allusions to the Oath-bound Covenant in its earthly and heavenly features, typically set forth in v. 4, and the allusions to God's sympathy with groaning Israel and the renewed promise to fulfill the Covenant and deliver them with great power and bring them to Canaan, set forth in vs. 5-8, have been explained, type and antitype, under Ex. 2:23-25; 3:6-10, 16-19; hence we need not repeat these explanations here. We will here explain, type and
Exodus.
92
antitype, only such features in vs. 4-8 as were not alluded to under the verses just cited. Such an item is contained in v. 6, in the expression, "a stretched out arm … and with great judgments." This expression means: manifestly expressed and exercised power, and large punishments. These were manifest in the rods scenes of Ex. 7, in the ten plagues and in the overthrow of the Egyptians in the Red Sea. The typical and antitypical significance of these we hope to give in due course. Another such item is found in v. 7, in God's promise to take Israel for His people and to offer Himself to them as their God, which types God's offering antitypical Israel of the spiritual and earthly classes the privilege of being His people and His offer of Himself to be their God, thus dwelling with one another in Oath-bound Covenant relations. The assurance to Israel (v. 7) that they would know that it was Jehovah who was their God types that God would to antitypical Israel in the Parousia and Epiphany and in the Millennium theoretically and factutually so reveal Himself to them that they would recognize that their God is the self-existent One, perfect in wisdom, power, justice and love. This entire address (vs. 1-8) types the comfort and encouragement, based on the Oath-bound Covenant, given by God to our Lord amid the disappointing experiences begun in 1877 by Satan's speeding up the curse. It is noteworthy that God both comforts and encourages even the glorified Jesus by the Covenant promises. Whenever, therefore, we are distressed, disappointed, cast down or otherwise in tribulation, let us learn to apply to ourselves, as faithful in consecration, the Covenant promises (Gen. 22:16-18), bound to us as they are by an oath of Jehovah Himself; and we shall find in them sufficient comfort, encouragement and strength (Heb. 6:13-20). It is also noteworthy that as God comforted and encouraged our Lord (vs. 1-5), He then charged Him to give the same comfort and encouragement to antitypical Israel (vs. 6-8), even as in
Efforts at Deliverance.
93
these verses He gave Moses the typical comfort, etc., and then charged him to administer these to Israel. Let us do so with one another after He has ministered His rich comfort and encouragement to us. Please note here again God stresses the Oath-bound Covenant.
(23) Very appropriately did God say that Israel (v. 7) would recognize Him as Jehovah, who was bringing them out from under the burdens of the Egyptians; for this is what was to be expected: that the God whose nature had such attributes of being, and whose character had such graces as Jehovah's, would show Himself as the Befriender and Deliverer of His oppressed people from their oppressors and that in such capacities He be recognized by them as Jehovah, their God. So antitypical Israel in seeing and experiencing God's befriending and delivering work for the Church and the world would thereby recognize that their covenant God is indeed Jehovah, the one absolutely perfect in all His attributes of being and character, all of whose attributes shine out as revelatory of Him in His nature and character in His glorious delivering and upbuilding work for His people as against their oppressors now and in the end of the next Age. Precious indeed to oppressed us are the assurances as to our promised inheritance of heavenly Canaan; and precious to the oppressed world are the assurances as to their promised inheritance in the paradisaic Canaan, as these are typed by the preciousness to oppressed Israel of the assurances of their promised inheritance in earthly Canaan (v. 8). The oath made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob types the oath attached to the Covenant (Gen. 22:16-18) as it applies to God, in His attribute of love especially (Abraham), to Jesus (Isaac) and to the Church (Jacob). How reassuring that oath is to us, especially in those great and sore trials amid which everything earthly is breaking against us! This, beloved, is indeed the anchor of our souls, both sure and steadfast and entering within the vail, whither the Forerunner hath for us entered, Jesus, made a High
Exodus.
94
Priest after the order of Melchizedek for the (this) Age (Heb. 6:19, 20)! God's adding here to the promise the statement, "I am Jehovah" (v. 8), was to certaintee to both typical and antitypical Israel the immutability of the promise. He Himself, in His attributes of being and character, is the guarantee to the respective Israels of the certainty of their promises, fulfilment. Praised be our God, the great Jehovah, in heaven, on earth and under the earth! And let the Israel of God everywhere say, Amen and Amen!
(24) Moses' telling (v. 9) the things stated in vs. 1-8 to Israel types the declaration of the Truth that Jesus made to the Lord's people from 1878 to late in 1880. It was during this time that by Him the brethren in the flesh were made to understand, and that more clearly, the overthrow of Satan's empire and the first resurrection as beginning in 1878 with the awakening of the sleeping saints and as proceeding with the others as they died, and the ransom as, to the Church, greatly clarified, incidental to the no-ransomism sifting that began in June, 1878, and proceeded throughout the three following years, yea, continued for years later and still continues. It was especially during this period, in 1879, that the light on the tabernacle in general, and on Leviticus 16 in particular, was by Jesus given, first to that Servant and then later to the Church, showing the two antitypical Sin-offerings, the two salvations in natures separate and distinct, the three great Covenants, one each proper and exclusive to each of the three Ages—Jewish, Gospel and Millennial—with the Christ, Head and Body, as the product of the Sarah Covenant and the Mediator of the New Covenant. Here, too, the doctrine of the World's High Priest was brought to light. It was in the giving of these truths, and others less important, from 1878 to 1880 that Jesus antityped Moses' telling (v. 9) the Israelites the things that God told him in vs. 1-8. In giving them to antitypical Israel Jesus spoke them, not exclusively, but especially
Efforts at Deliverance.
95
through our Pastor, who was, shortly after this period began, made that Servant—in 1879. We have described how this was done in its historical setting in EPIPHANY STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES, Vol. IX, 361-373. How finely these truths and others accompanying them at that time antityped the statements of vs. 1-8, rehearsed by Moses to the Israelites (v. 9)! But the reception that Israel at this juncture gave to Moses' declaration was to him deeply disappointing—"They harkened not to Moses for anguish of spirit, and for cruel bondage." These words deserve special attention. They indicate that the increase of their oppression had so broken their spirit as to have crushed out of their hearts the expectation of deliverance and therefore they heeded not Moses' words. In this they typed the experience that antitypical Israelites not in the Truth had between April, 1878, and about October, 1881. This particular period was the most barren of the whole reaping time, so far as winning new ones for the Truth is concerned. We do not refer to the new Spirit-begettings, none of which occurred between April, 1878, and about October, 1881; for it will be recalled that the fulness of the Gentiles came in probationally by the Passover of 1878 (Rom. 11:25-29; compare B 210, par. 1 with 223, pars. 1-3); and that special calls began to go out by October, 1881, as a proof that the general call had shortly before ceased. Naturally there would be no new begettings between the time of the Gentiles' fulness in April, 1878, on the one hand, and the going forth of the first special calls October, 1881, on the other hand, a proof of the end of the general call April, 1878. But it is not so much this particular feature that is referred to in v. 9. Rather, it refers to the fact that the message received scant attention from new creatures and others outside of the Truth movement and that very few new ones, even those newly begotten, came into the Truth in these 3½ years.
(25) It was the antitypical increase in the oppression that wrought this effect, as the antitype of the Israelites'
Exodus.
96
not harkening to Moses' message to them, as an effect of the increased oppression described in Ex. 5. This message was a repetition of that found in vs. 1-8 and was given immediately afterward by Moses (v. 9) to Israel. If we look at this antitypical increase of oppression from the standpoint of error especially, this will become apparent. In the Spring of 1878 not only had the brethren expected favor to return to Israel (B 223, par. 1), they expected not only the sleeping saints, but also the living saints, to get their change on Nisan 16, 1878, paralleling our Lord's resurrection (Z '16, 38, 4). This proclamation was made not only in private, but also in public, resulting, when the change of the living saints did not take place as forecast, (1) in many of the public turning against the Truth movement as a falsely prophesying one; and (2) in Mr. Barbour (who radically and dogmatically advocated this change at that date, while Bro. Russell, though expecting it, also told the brethren to be conservative about it as by no means a certain dogmatic thing), to prevent his losing influence as a teacher, seeking to divert attention from his mistake, by denying the ransom and thereby inaugurating and increasing the first Harvest sifting, which continued full-fledged until about October in 1881. The antitypical Israelites, both those begotten and those unbegotten of the Spirit, outside of the Truth movement, beholding these two untoward things—a false forecast proven such by the event, and the ransom controversy raging among the Truth people, naturally held aloof from its message. Furthermore, many antitypical Israelites, not knowing of the two above-mentioned unfavorable conditions, were nevertheless so blinded by Babylonian error on the Church in God's plan, on this life ending all probation, on eternal torment, on the judgment day, on God's justice, on the day of wrath, etc., as to think the message of restitution too good to be true and the high calling too great for them to aspire to. Thus they harkened not to the message that Jesus gave between
Efforts at Deliverance.
97
April, 1878, and about October, 1881. The increased oppression in the form of sin in its varied ramifications, as shown above, beat down some by their weakness in its presence, bringing them into repeated falls, which discouraged their efforts to live according to the Truth; and it did the same with others, by its increasing their difficulties in overcoming it, which hindered their coming into the Truth, as putting harder demands on their overcoming powers. Thus for anguish of spirit and cruel bondage antitypical Israelites harkened not to the voice of Jesus for the about 3½ involved years, through the Truth message antitypical of the statement of v. 9, in its implying the thoughts of vs. 1-8. Immeasurably sadder was the condition resulting from the antitypical oppression than that from the typical oppression referred to in v. 9, since the antitypical was the worse oppression.
(26) During this same period, April, 1878, to about October, 1881, God encouraged our Lord to launch another public effort along lines similar to that of April, 1877, to April, 1878, antitypical of God's second charge to Moses to go to Pharaoh and request of him to let Israel go out of his land (vs. 10, 11); for we are to remember that the private work done among antitypical Israel antityped the work done in the type to typical Israel, while the public work of the Harvest time antityped the addresses, requests and demands made on Pharaoh. And such public efforts, but very feeble and small, were attempted during these about 3½ years, feeble and small because of the untoward circumstances of the Truth movement and the irresponsiveness of the oppressed antitypical Israelites outside of the Truth. And, as indicated above, almost no new ones were won for the Truth and exceedingly little heed was given to the message in public meetings, in sharpshooter and volunteer work and in the correspondence and conversation work. These conditions made those the most barren 3½ years of the entire reaping period. Moses' reply as to the Lord's charge
Exodus.
98
in vs. 10, 11, is quite significant and seemed a strong argument. It seemed and was unanswerable, if winning immediate results were the only consideration prompting one to carry out the Lord's charges; for if Israelites would not harken to Moses, Pharaoh certainly was not to be expected so to do. Notice the difference in the expressions: Jehovah spake to Moses; Moses spake before Jehovah. Apparently Moses did not speak the thoughts of v. 12 directly to God, but to others, especially to Aaron (v. 13), and of necessity in Jehovah's hearing and respecting matters of God, hence said it in Jehovah's hearing. This is, we think, the import of the difference in the two expressions.
(27) Antitypically we believe this refers to our Lord's attitude toward the almost entirely resultless public work of the 3½ involved years as being this: it is useless to spend energy on so unpromising a work. His attitude doubtless was reflected in the attitude of antitypical Aaron toward the most entirely fruitless public efforts put forth during that time. Thus our Lord's attitude toward the almost fruitless public efforts was the antitypical speech before Jehovah. Attitudes, as well as acts, speak louder than words, especially to Jehovah! Certainly it is true that if antitypical Israelites would not harken to the Harvest message at that time, Satan, when just starting out with his increased oppression to prevent antitypical Israel's release, was in no mood to accede to the demand. By Moses' saying that he was of uncircumcised lips, he probably meant that his speech and propaganda seemed to Pharaoh to be too undeferential for an ambassador to put before him as a king and was contrary to Pharaoh's ideals and desires as to the matter at issue between them; hence he impressed Pharaoh as being lacking in a proper meekness toward him as Egypt's king—a figurative uncircumcised condition of lips in Pharaoh's sight, thus making the end sought by his ambassadorship unobtainable, Moses' speech and propaganda being unacceptable to the king.
Efforts at Deliverance.
99
This types the fact that the Harvest message which Jesus gave at that time and stage of its development struck Satan as not that of a consecrated (circumcised) kind. Satan had his idea of consecration and its accompanying teachings. These he had issued forth, especially through his clerical mouthpieces. Jesus' message, even in its at that time comparatively undeveloped form, struck Satan as not submissive and deferential enough to, and not harmonious enough with, his ideals on such subjects; for there were fundamental contradictions between the two sets of views, making the end sought by Jesus' ambassadorship with the emperor of the present evil world unobtainable, which was a fact so long as it was sought by moral suasion alone. Thus force had to be added, both in the type and antitype. Noteworthy is the dual form of the Hebrew word for lips, not plural shephatim, but dual shephataim (v. 9), i.e., two lips, which word, we believe, refers in the antitype to the teachings of the two salvations, the lower being the main theme of the Old and the higher being that of the New Testament. We believe that vs. 29, 30, refer, as a repetition, to the same conversation and words as are found in vs. 10-12, but that they are repeated because God wanted to identify the time of this conversation with the continuance of it in the first part of chapter 7, Ex. 6:14-27 being thrown in as a parenthesis, which antitypically enables us to see that the period of the antitypical efforts at, and success in deliverance covers the Parousia and Epiphany, as vs. 14-27 prove. Therefore vs. 10-13 and 28-30 are to be connected with the conversation of Jehovah and Moses in Ex. 7:1-5.
(28) God's giving (v. 13) a charge to Moses and Aaron toward Israel and Pharaoh, to deliver Israel from Egypt, types God's charging Jesus and the Church to work privately (Israel) with antitypical Israelites and publicly (Pharaoh) with Satan, to deliver antitypical Israel from Satan's empire. This charge was given from about October, 1880, to October,
Exodus.
100
1881. As a preparation for its execution, so far as Jesus' acting through that Servant is concerned, Jesus and that Servant occupied themselves in the preparation of the two booklets, Food For Thinking Christians, or Why Was Evil Permitted? and Tabernacle Shadows, which were prepared from October, 1880, to about June, 1881, and then went through the press in the summer of 1881 and were ready for distribution in September. The public distribution of the first of these two pieces of literature was one of the most important single features of the entire Harvest. The second of these was sent out, not to the public in general, which would be an address to Satan, asking deliverance for antitypical Israel, as was the first of these, but to those only who were interested by the first to the extent of inquiring for more help (antitypical Israelites). Thus both features of Jehovah's charge of v. 13 entered into fulfilment with the fall of 1881. The first of these works, as clearly commanded and then executed, is typically described in Ex. 7:8-13, under whose consideration we hope to give the pertinent details. It is because of the great forwarding of the Harvest work caused by the distribution of Food For Thinking Christians, and because of the immediately preceding and accompanying siftings, as well as of those that followed, that the genealogies, as typical of the groupings of many of the Lord's people resulting therefrom, are, as a parenthesis, sandwiched in between the command to do the involved public and private work and certain accompanying instructions and encouragements pertaining to, and the execution of, that work. While the type does not seem to show why this parenthesis on certain genealogies (Ex. 6:14-27) occurs here, the antitype fully clarifies the presence of this parenthesis where it is.
(29) If we keep in mind the antitypical setting of the section of Scripture which we are studying, from the time of Moses' and Aaron's arrival in Egypt onward to Israel's departure from Egypt, as referring to
Efforts at Deliverance.
101
conditions during the first and second stages of our Lord's Second Advent, we will see that this part of the type refers not only to the Parousia, but also to the Epiphany. We have already called attention to this fact as pointed out in types previously considered; and in the study of Ex. 6:14-27 we will find other very strong evidence in proof of the same fact. Note, after giving the genealogies and mentioning Moses and Aaron among them, this section, in vs. 26, 27, remarks as follows: "These are that Aaron and Moses, to whom the Lord said, Bring out [by a private ministry] the children of Israel … "according to their armies [groups of warriors for the Lord—the Parousia Priests and the Epiphany Priests, Levites and the twelve secular tribes]. These are they [Moses and Aaron, acting antitypically in their capacity as God's Special Ambassador and this Ambassador's special mouthpiece during the Parousia and Epiphany] which spake [by their public ministry] to Pharaoh, king of Egypt, to bring out the children of Israel from Egypt. These are that Moses and Aaron [not the antitypical Moses and Aaron of the wilderness march to the Red Sea and its crossing, not the antitypical Moses and Aaron of the march to Sinai, not the antitypical Moses and Aaron of Sinai, not the antitypical Moses and Aaron of the wilderness journey from Sinai onward, not the antitypical Moses and Aaron of the smitten rock and the consequent exclusion from Canaan]." These definite and limiting expressions are inserted here to enable us in the antitype to recognize exactly the phase of the Moses and Aaron antitypes that is here called to our attention. They therefore prove that their ministry from the standpoint of the type, from their arrival in, to their departure from Egypt, types the delivering activities of Jesus and the Church during the Parousia and Epiphany. This fact enables us to construe the primary antitypes of the genealogies of Ex. 6:14-25 as belonging to the Parousia and Epiphany, though the tentative and reckoned deliverance
Exodus.
102
that faith justification has given from symbolic Egypt all through the Age warrants, as secondary antitypes, our application of the Levite features of this genealogy to the Gospel-Age Levites, as we have done, e.g., in EPIPHANY STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES, Vol. VIII, 27-108. With these prefatory remarks we are now prepared for a consideration of the details, type and antitype, of Ex. 6:14-27, particularly those in vs. 14-25, having just given details on vs. 26, 27.
(30) First of all it will be noted that vs. 14-25 do not give a full genealogy of Israelites and Levites. Only three of the tribes are mentioned, one of which is that of Levi. Again, the subdivisions of the Amramite and Hebronite Levites are not here given. These omissions are not to be regarded as accidental. They are specifically designed; for only those genealogies are given that are intended to describe only specially active divisions among the Levites and tribal Israelites, as a finished picture, after our Lord's Parousia set in, up to, and including the departure from symbolic Egypt of the involved groups by the end of the Epiphany. First of all, two of the twelve non-sacred tribes, in their heads of families, are presented: Reuben in his four groups descendent from Reuben's four sons, and Simeon in his six groups descendent from Simeon's six sons. We understand that the Epiphany Camp adherents of those Epiphany Levites, who sought but failed to obtain control of the three corporations that our Pastor left, and not those Levites themselves, are here typed by Reuben and his descendants; and that the Epiphany Camp adherents of those Epiphany Levites who sought and obtained control of the three corporations that our Pastor left, and not those Levites themselves, are here typed by Simeon and his descendants. The reason that we so view this matter is the following: The leaders [crown-losing princes of the Epiphany, not those of the Gospel Age!] of these two Epiphany tribes (Reuben and Simeon),
Efforts at Deliverance.
103
as parts of the Epiphany Camp, are Epiphany Gershonite Levites and Epiphany Merarite Levites.
(31) Already have the Epiphany Merarite Levites in their Society adherents built a fair sized part of the Epiphany tribe of Simeon. And they will after their cleansing, which will perhaps take place after Armageddon, though it may take place during Armageddon, greatly increase their Epiphany Camp adherents. This we gather, among other things, from the fact that Jehu's grandson Joash, or Jehoash, as the third member of the Jehu dynasty to reign after Jehu's revolution, in his capacity as king regarded Elisha as the Lord's special mouthpiece to Israel and acted in harmony with that thought (2 Kings 13:14-25). This implies Elisha's great influence at that time and types the large post-Armageddon influence of the Society brethren over the Epiphany Camp. On the other hand, after their cleansing the Epiphany Gershonites, as the lay preachers, missionaries, evangelists, leaders of pastoral workers' classes and pastors of that time, will turn many through faith in the truths of Volume I into the Epiphany tribe of Reuben in the Epiphany Camp. We believe the divisions of these two tribes, as indicated in vs. 14, 15, are along language lines, as were those of the Gospel-Age Reubenites and Simeonites, EPIPHANY STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES, Vol. VIII, 15 (14)—18 (16). Therefore we classify them as follows: Reuben's son Hanoch, or Enoch (teaching, or dedicated) represents the English-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Gershonite Levites. His son Pallu (famous) represents the Germanic-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Gershonite Levites. His son Hezron (blooming) represents the Slavonic-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Gershonite Levites. And his son Carmi (vine dresser) types the Scandinavian-speaking Camp adherents of the Gershonite Levites. The Gershonite activities as such are now in the lands of these four language groups almost exclusively among Truth people,
Exodus.
104
except in Poland, where they work toward the public; for as yet they as a whole are doing very little in the way of a camp-building work among the peoples of these four language groups. Simeon's son Jemuel (God's day) represents the English-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites. His son Jamin (right hand) represents the Germanic-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites. His son Ohad (might) represents the Romance-languaged (French, Hispanian and Italian) Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites. His son Jachin (established) represents the Slavic-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites. His son Zohar (brightness) represents the Scandinavian-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites. And his son Shaul (asked, desired) represents the Greek-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites. Shaul's being the son of a Canaanitish woman perhaps types the fact that the Greek-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites will be the most error-developed group of this tribe, being influenced by the Greek Church.
(32) Next (v. 16) come the Levites in this genealogy, as the last of the three tribes here genealogized. We have in various parts of our writings given the most of the Epiphany antitypes of these and will for the most part but briefly indicate these here. The Epiphany Gershonites type those Truth people who in the Epiphany sought but failed to obtain control of Bro. Russell's corporations and then formed two organizations of their own. The Epiphany Merarites represent those Truth people who in the Epiphany sought and obtained control of Bro. Russell's corporations and then, in the case of one of their groups, formed another corporation. The Epiphany Kohathites represent those Truth people who in the Epiphany use no corporations or associations to do their work, their work, while largely individually wrought, being more or less directed by certain of their leaders. All three classes of these Epiphany Levites are, like the three
Efforts at Deliverance.
105
groups of Levites in the other periods, typed from the standpoint of their adherence or non-adherence to corporations or associations, in Num. 8:1-9. Levi himself represents the Levites as a whole. The Epiphany Gershonites (v. 17) are divided, into two groups: the Epiphany Libnites (free or wilful ones) are the adherents of the British Bible Students Committee (B. S. C., for short). The Epiphany Shimites (famous ones) are the adherents of the Pastoral Bible Institute (P. B. I, for short), of which the Dawnites are an off-shoot. The Epiphany Amramites (v. 18) are the Hirsho-Kittingerites. The Epiphany Izeharites (v. 18) are the self-appointed usurping Levitical exegetes. The Epiphany Hebronites (v. 18) are the Ritchieites, who, however, are now feeling around for another leader, since Bro. Ritchie refuses to act as a leader. The Epiphany Uzzielites (v. 18) are the Sturgeonites, who for years have lost Menta Sturgeon as a leader and have ceased to act as a movement, which is also true of the Ritchieites. Others are now making their bid to be their leaders. Kohath himself type's the organization or association abhorring and non-adhering Levites. The Epiphany Mahlite Merarites (v. 19) are the Society adherents; and the Epiphany Mushite Merarites are the Standfasts, whose present most active group is the Elijah Voice Society, which seems to have and control the fourth Merarite antitypical wagon.
(33) In v. 20 Amram does not represent the same as the Epiphany Amramites, which he does in Numbers; for it will be remembered that in v. 20 Amram's sons, Moses and Aaron, represent Jesus and the Church in the Parousia and Epiphany, as we showed above. Moreover, it was Moses' two sons, Gershom and Eliezer, who headed the Amramite Levites, not Amram, nor Aaron, nor Moses, since the latter two are regarded by God as His priests (1 Chro. 23:14-17; Ps. 99:6). As pointed out in Chapter I, Amram (high people) here seems to type God as our
Exodus.
106
Lord's and the Church's Father, and Jochebed (glorified) seems to type the Truth and its Servants, the Sarah Covenant. The Septuagint, the Vulgate and the Syriac all render a part of this text as follows: "the daughter of his father's sister." There has, therefore, probably fallen out of v. 20 the Hebrew word for daughter (bath) before the words, "his father's sister". This remark must be made, since it is a violation of moral law to marry a father's sister (Lev. 20:19), but not so in the case of a first cousin. Also God would scarcely have blessed such an immoral relation with such children as Moses, Aaron and Miriam (Num. 26:59). It will be noticed that the name of Miriam is in this verse omitted. But one of the old Hebrew MMS., the Samaritan Pentateuch, also the Septuagint and the Syriac texts of this verse, all have it. The expression, "and Miriam, their sister," probably belongs in this verse. If it does, she should be regarded here, as in some (but not all) other passages, as a type of the Great Company. As already shown, Izehar types, for the Epiphany, the self-appointed usurping exegetes, who are divided into the sin-offering siftlings of the Parousia and Epiphany (Num. 26:11) (Korah—baldness—in allusion to their great bereftment of Truth), into the adherents of Bro. Olson (Nepheg—root) and into the adherents of Bro. Gunter (Zichri—remembered). We have already shown that the Uzzielites (v. 22) are the Sturgeonites. Milton Riemer with much of Menta Sturgeon's views, spirit and practices, masking under the name of a St. Joseph, Mo., class, is leading the movement of Riemerites, typed by Mishael (whom God saves); others have taken up some of Menta Sturgeon's spirit, views and practices, apparently not suspecting this fact, and formed two groups: the Bolgerites (Elzaphan—God watches) and the Lardenites (Zithri-protected).
(34) Aaron (enlightened, teacher; v. 23) represents here the Parousia and Epiphany Church as Christ's mouthpiece to the brethren and the public.
Efforts at Deliverance.
107
Elisheba (God's oath) represents the Oath-bound Covenant, by union with which the Church as Christ's mouthpiece developed (1) certain Truth-leaders in the Parousia who later became the Parousia leaders of siftings by teaching false doctrines (Nadab—wilful; Lev. 10:1, 2); (2) certain Truth-leaders in the Epiphany (Abihu—He is my father) who later became Epiphany leaders of siftings by teaching false doctrines (Lev. 10:1, 2); (3) the Parousia messenger (Eleazar—God is help), who was given charge (a) of the Church, (b) of its doctrinal, correctional, refutational and ethical teachings, (c) of its work (Num. 4:16; Matt. 24:45-47; Luke 12:42-44), (d) of the Kohathites (Num. 3:32) and (e) specifically of the correct interpretation of the Scriptures on the ransom, atonement, sin-offerings, mediator and covenants (Num. 16:37-41); and (4) the Epiphany Messenger (Ithamar—land or isle of palms=Great Company and Youthful Worthy matters), whose charge is (a) to interpret for the Church, Great Company and Youthful Worthies everything Biblical not interpreted by the Parousia Messenger (Rev. 19:9, 10); (b) to expound and defend correctly everything connected with the antitypical Tabernacle, regardless of whether it was already done by the Servant or not (Ex. 38:21); (c) to supervise the work of dealing with the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies; (d) to direct the work of the Epiphany Gershonites and Merarites of both the Great Company and Youthful Worthies (Num. 4:28, 33) and (e) to arrange their corporations and associations (Num. 7:8). Korah's three sons (v. 29) type the three groups of the sin-offering siftlings: (1) the Williamsonites (Assir, prisoner); (2) the Henningesites (Elkanah, provided by God); and (3) the McPhailites (Abiasaph, my father gathers). Eleazar (v. 25) types our Pastor as that Servant in his relations as overseer and teacher to the Church and the Kohathite Great Company and Youthful Worthy Levites, i.e., toward these as Truth people;
Exodus.
108
but Eleazar's son, Phinehas (brazen face), types our Pastor in his relation to the nominal church—the Camp (Num. 25:1-18). Our Pastor suffered great affliction (Putiel—afflicted for God) in his zeal for God as He was misrepresented, slandered and dishonored by the false teachings and wrong practices of the Camp, which made him of strong countenance—"he presented a bold front"—(developed himself into Phinehas, brazen face) against such teachings and practices. Phinehas, therefore, types him as a priest in his relations to the errors and wrong practices of the nominal church. Certainly his face was set like brass in strength against these errors and wrong practices. The name of Eleazar's wife is nowhere mentioned in the Bible, so far as we have been able to trace. This may type the fact that Eleazar did not exercise other qualities and teachings than his usual qualities and teachings exercised as a priest among the real people of God, when he developed himself into the Phinehas feature of his ministry—his work toward the nominal people of God. The above are the groups and individuals (v. 25) specially brought to attention as particularly active in the Parousia and Epiphany, the deliverance time.
(35) We have above sufficiently commented on vs. 26-30, severed by the genealogical parenthesis of vs. 14-25, from vs. 10-13, of which they are a repetition. Accordingly, our study has completely covered Ex. 6 and brought us up to Ex. 7, which up to v. 14 we will now proceed to expound. From Ex. 7:13 we will skip to Ex. 10:21. The reason for the omission is that the omitted verses treat of the first eight plagues, whose detailed discussion we leave for consideration until we treat the three woes and seven last plagues of Revelation. We cannot well avoid the treatment of the ninth and tenth plague here, because they are most of all vitally, directly and causally related to Israel's deliverance, and because its general thought has already been given by our Pastor, while he has written next to nothing
Efforts at Deliverance.
109
on the first nine plagues. All that we here need say on the first plague is that it is neither in type nor in antitype the third sign given to convince Israel; for that sign was worked by Aaron almost immediately on his and Moses' arrival in Egypt, and that in private only before Israel (Ex. 4:30), while the first plague was worked on all Egyptians, and that in a public manner. We make this remark because the more or less similarity between the third sign and the first plague should not lead us to identify them, even as we should not identify the first sign, turning the rod into a serpent, with Aaron's encounter with the Egyptian magicians, though they are of course similar; for the first, like the second and third signs, was given to convince Israelites alone, while the encounter with the Egyptian sorcerers (Ex. 7:8-13) was to controvert Pharaoh. The reason that we make the above remark is so that our readers will not identify the two by getting the thought that our Pastor, by explaining the third sign as applying to the Truth, given through the tract service by the volunteers, as becoming bloody, repulsive, to the Egyptians, and by holding that the first typical plague was fulfilled by the refutative Truth given in Volume II, identified both (Rev. 16:3). This last remark will show that the numerical order of the woes and plagues of Revelation is not the same as that of the ten plagues as recorded in Exodus.
(36) In Ex. 7:1-7 Jehovah gives further powers, encouragement and instruction to Moses for himself and for Aaron, to qualify them for their enlarged work, typical of His giving Jesus and the Church further powers, encouragement and instruction for the enlarged work into which they were to enter in September, 1881, and in which they were to continue as the Parousia and Epiphany would advance. Hitherto Moses had not been given more power than Pharaoh. Indeed he had exercised power inferior to Pharaoh's hitherto. But in his being empowered to be a god to Pharaoh (v. 1), he was given power both superior to
Exodus.
110
Pharaoh's and over Pharaoh; and Aaron was to share in this enlargement of power, inasmuch as he was to be the mouthpiece (v. 1) of one greatly enlarged in power. So, antitypically, from October, 1874, to September, 1881, our Lord did not in His pertinent works use more power than Satan. Up to that time, like His type Moses, His exercise of power adversely to Satan, in respect to mankind's enslavement and deliverance, had been limited almost exclusively to moral suasion—a thing that was comparatively influenceless so far as Pharaoh's and Satan's courses were concerned, who accordingly despised and spurned it. But Jehovah changed this matter from 1881 onward; for in that year He began to use our Lord to exercise a power superior to Satan's and over him. Already He had received this increase of power, though not immediately exercising it toward Satan (Ex. 6:10-13, 28-30). Indeed God had cast out hints to this effect already in 1878, seeing that Christ is God's arm (Is. 53:1; Ex. 6:1, 6). But it was not until September, 1881, that this added power began to be exercised by our Lord against and over Satan. The charge (v. 2) to Moses to speak all which Jehovah commanded him implied that He was to do this to Aaron as His mouthpiece, who should then declare it to Pharaoh and Israel, as the case would require (v. 2). The thing that Aaron was to say to Pharaoh was a charge, no longer a request deferrable to Pharaoh's whims, that Pharaoh should send Israel away from Egypt. So, antitypically, the charge to Jesus was that He should make known everything that the Father revealed to Him on the matter of the Church's and the world's deliverance from Satan's tyranny and empire; but He was to do all this speaking privately to the Church, which in turn through the public work would make it known to Satan. And the thing that the Church would say was to be, not a request meekly presented to Satan and dependent on his whim as to whether he would comply, but a demand backed by such a degree of
Efforts at Deliverance.
111
Divine power as to force its granting. This demand was to release God's people from the oppression and tyranny of the curse.
(37) God's statement to Moses (v. 3) that He would harden Pharaoh's heart, as effected by God's kindness in releasing plague after plague on Pharaoh's request, backed by a promise to release Israel, has already been explained. Here the result of the hardening is set forth: "And I will increase My signs and wonders in the land of Egypt." So, antitypically, Jehovah by 1881 assured Jesus that by His kindness in setting aside plague after plague, on Satan's request; accompanied by promises to release antitypical Israel, He would harden Satan's heart. Jehovah assured Jesus that Satan's dishonest and dishonorable course therein would result in only more severe plagues coming upon him and his servants. Jehovah's statement to Moses (v. 4), that Pharaoh would not obey and that He would lay His hand on Egypt and bring forth His hosts, His people, the children of Israel, from Egypt with great punishments upon it, types Jehovah's telling our Lord that Satan would not obey the demand, and that consequently Jehovah would use Christ as His power exercised on Egypt so forcibly in punishing judgments as to work the deliverance of God's army, His people, even antitypical Israel, from Satan's empire. God's assuring Moses (v. 5) that His exercised power in such judgments would teach the Egyptians to recognize Him as Jehovah, the self-existent God of perfect character, types Jehovah's assuring our Lord by 1881 that God's power exercised by Christ in such punishments as Jehovah intended to send to the servants of Satan would force them to recognize Jehovah as the self-existent One, perfect in wisdom, power, justice and love. Moses' and Aaron's doing what the Lord commanded them (v. 6) types Jesus' and the Church's keeping the antitypical charge in the public work connected with the circulation of Food For Thinking Christians, of which 1,400,000 copies were
Exodus.
112
distributed in Tower and booklet form among English-speaking peoples, usually through their delivery at Protestant church doors to the congregations as they left after the Sunday morning or evening services, by telegram delivery boys (Z '16, 174, par. 14). Two brothers furnished the $40,000.00 needed to publish and circulate it. Of this that Servant gave $35,000.00, hearing which, the other brother, chagrined at being so much outdone in liberality, shortly afterward left the Truth movement. Of course, pilgrim lectures, elder teaching, correspondence and conversations further shared in this public work. The private work among the brethren was in the private circulation of Food For Thinking Christians and Tabernacle Shadows, reinforced by the other methods just stated. The chronological statements of v. 7 are intended to show antitypically that Jesus was perfectly mature for His work from 1881 on and that Aaron was so only in a progressive and not complete sense, reckonedly only, 80 years, the double of 40 years, the period of perfect trial and approval of the Faithful, and the 83 years, not a perfect double of 40 years, suggesting these two lines of thought.
(38) Vs. 8 and 9 contain a further charge by God to Moses and Aaron as to what they should do when they would appear before Pharaoh and he would demand a sign as a credential of their ambassadorship from Jehovah. Moses was to tell Aaron to cast his rod down and it would become a tanin, not a nachash. Nachash means serpent and is the word used in Ex. 4:3; and this change of the rod into a serpent was performed by Aaron in his performing the first of the three signs before Israel (Ex. 4:30), as charged by Jehovah in Ex. 4:1-5. But in v. 9 the rod was changed into a tanin. The plural of this word (taninim) is mistranslated whales in Gen. 1:21. Rotherham translates it sea-serpent; and Young translates it monster. It is the Bible word used to cover the whole aggregation of monstrous animals of the earth
Efforts at Deliverance.
113
before man's advent on earth, like the dinosaur, diplodocus, stegosaurus, megantisaurus, gigantisaurus, and immense land or water lizards, crocodiles and serpents and amphibians, etc. The most general term applicable to them is reptile, though the one mainly used in the A. V. is dragon. Rationalists a hundred and a hundred and fifty years ago ridiculed the Bible for mentioning dragons. They, strutting about in their imagined superior wisdom, alleged that these were mere myths, conjured up by the childish imagination of primitive man, which they, the heroes of the Illumination, had out-grown. But now the spade of the geologist and the archeologist has dug up many of these monsters from earth's strata, and one of them (the gigantisaurus, shown in the Photo Drama of Creation) measures about 165 feet in length. Dragon or reptile, perhaps in the sense of a crocodile, is likely the right translation in Ex. 7:9, 10, 12. But if a serpent is here meant, it was not a small but a very large one, larger than a large boa constrictor; for such like only were included among the prehuman taninim. The other Biblical occurrences of the word tanin are Gen. 1:21; Ezek. 29:3; 32:2; Deut. 32:33; Ps. 91:13; Jer. 51:34; Neh. 2:13; Job 7:12; Ps. 74:13; 148:7; Is. 27:1; 51:9. In a number of these references it applies figuratively to Satan, as this is the case with its corresponding Greek word drachon, in several of the Revelation uses of this Greek word, which also is used there of the civil power, especially Rome. The civil power is also meant in Ps. 91:13. This usage is true, because the civil powers referred to in these passages have been devilish as Satan's tools. The crocodile is more than likely meant by tanin in vs. 9, 10, 12, because it was especially sacred to the Egyptians as divine, i.e., really Satanic, like Satan, sin and evil. On this account what would likely have been more disconcerting and convincing to Pharaoh than for Aaron to change his rod into a crocodile?
Exodus.
114
(39) Antitypically the charge meant that Jesus and the Aaron class, when required by Satan through his mouthpieces to give convincing credentials for their being Divine messengers, were to set forth the Truth on why evil (which came from, and is like Satan, the dragon) was permitted. This required the Church to exercise her power as teacher (rod), which, so exercised, gave the true explanation. The explanation given for mankind's evil in general was that evil was permitted in order to educate the race by experience as to the exceeding sinfulness of sin and the terribleness of its effects, so that the reverse experience with good may teach the reverse lesson as to righteousness, both these experiences being calculated to turn men against sin and in favor of righteousness; and for the Church's evil was, (1) sacrificial; (2) destructive of bad; and (3) constructive of good qualities. This charge was fulfilled antitypically (v. 10) by the public circulation of the booklet, Food For Thinking Christians, and pertinent public lectures, correspondences and conversations. Privately the Lord's people got the benefit of it through that booklet and the booklet, Tabernacle Shadows, as well as by pilgrim lectures, elders' lessons, letters and conversations. Pharaoh's (v. 11) calling his wise men and his sorcerers types Satan's gathering his learned and error-teaching leaders, as his mouthpieces, to present refutations on the same subject. The magicians, Jannes and Jambres, casting down their rods type learned and error-teaching leaders offering false or insufficient explanations on the subject. Aaron's tanin swallowing their taninim types how the Church's explanation of the subject completely refuted those of the antitypical magicians. The only real effect that was accomplished, type and antitype, by this scene, so far as the typical and antitypical Pharaohs were concerned, was to harden their hearts, a proof that Truth and error both exercise a hardening effect on a wicked, self-centered heart and mind. In type and antitype God forecast this effect.
Efforts at Deliverance.
115
(40) Moses is silent on the names of those Israelites who curried favor with Pharaoh as against Moses and Aaron on this occasion, as he is also silent as to their nationality being Israelitish. But St. Paul supplies these two lacks, by naming and, in so doing, giving them Hebrew names, as suggesting their Israelitish nationality; for influential Egyptians would not bear names of slaves' language (2 Tim. 3:8, 9). This account is another proof that the account of Israel's enslavement and deliverance has a Parousia and Epiphany fulfilment: Jannes (he deceives) being used to set forth the Parousia spiritual Israelitish apostate errorists, currying favor with what is really Satan on the subject; and Jambres (he revolutionizes) being used to set forth the Epiphany spiritual Israelitish apostate errorists, currying favor with what is really Satan on the subject. Our Pastor applied these two sorcerers as types of apostate Truth teaching leaders and apostate nominal-church teaching leaders. In his time it was not due to see the Epiphany feature; hence he never called attention to it. But St. Paul, by the plural, last days, the Parousia Day and the Epiphany Day, points out both, and the fulfillments prove both. We see the same phenomena in part in Nadab and Abihu, in offering strange fire, and in Moses and Aaron, in smiting the rock. Nadab represents Truth leaders of the Jewish Harvest and the Parousia who later presented error before the Lord, i.e., to the Church. Abihu types Truth leaders of the times between the Harvests and of the Epiphany who later presented error before the Lord, i.e., to the Church. Moses' smiting the rock the first time represents new-creature leaders in the Jewish Harvest and in the Parousia renouncing the ransom; and his smiting the rock the second time represents such new-creature leaders in the Jewish Harvest and in the Parousia renouncing the Church's share in the sin-offering; while Aaron represents such like persons doing these two things between the two Harvests and in the Epiphany.
Exodus.
116
The Jannes and Jambres picture, more restricted in time, since it is exclusively Parousiac and Epiphaniac, is wider than the related Moses and Aaron picture; for the latter's teachings have been with reference only to why God has permitted the sufferings of Head and Body throughout the Age, denying their sin sacrificial character, while the Jannes and Jambres picture not only includes these two errors at the end of the Age, but errors on why evil is permitted among all other classes connected with God's plan. The Nadab and Abihu picture, as to persons represents only Truth leaders who later became false teachers in the Church, and thus before Jehovah; and so far as the extent of their errors is concerned, they cover a wider ground than the other two groups, whose errors cover in the Moses and Aaron picture the question of why evil afflicts the Christ, and in the Jannes and Jambres picture the question of why evils afflict all classes; but in the Nadab and Abihu picture not only the foregoing phases of the question of the permission of evil, but all other errors taught among God's people, are included, as typed by Lev. 10:1-7 for the whole Age, and by Ex. 6:23 for the Parousia and Epiphany.
(41) It will be recalled that it was stated that there would be omitted in this chapter a discussion of Ex. 7:14—10:20, which contains the history of the first eight plagues, because we believe it to be the Lord's will for us to omit a close consideration of these until we come to a discussion of the first two woes and the seven last plagues of Revelation, when, as treating of the same subjects, we will study them. Our intention to discuss the tenth plague is due to two considerations: (1) unlike his course with the first nine plagues and their equivalents in Revelation, our Pastor has given us considerable on the tenth plague; and (2) though announcing the third woe, which is the same as the tenth plague, as coming shortly after the end of the second woe (Rev. 11:14), the book of Revelation does not expressly, describe it by name, though it describes the
Efforts at Deliverance.
117
events that inflict it without calling them the third woe; and on this part of the book our Pastor gave us not a few thoughts. These considerations move us, therefore, to omit for the present a study of Ex. 7:14—10:20 and to take up anew our study of Israel's enslavement and deliverance with Ex. 10:21, where the events following the eighth plague are begun to be presented.
(42) Darkness (Ex. 10:21-23) was the ninth plague, which corresponds to the fifth of the seven last plagues of Revelation, as the reference to darkness in each case proves (Rev. 16:10, 11). It will from this and several other cases be noted that the time order of the presentation of the ten plagues, and the three woes and seven last plagues is not in most cases the same. We believe the reason for this difference, so far as the time order of the seven last plagues and their equivalents among the ten plagues is concerned, is this: The seven last plagues give the time order in which the seven volumes would appear, parts of whose contents consisted of plaguesome thoughts, while the numerical order of the corresponding plagues in Egypt gives the time order in which the plaguing thoughts first began to make themselves felt, whether expressed in or apart from the seven volumes. Thus anti-trinitarianism, the main thought of Vol. V, began to make itself felt late in the Harvest (as pictured in the ninth Egyptian plague), when for the first time it began to be presented to the public, e.g., in the B.S.M., Emperor Constantine was Trinity Maker (B.S.M., Vol. 6, No. 4, i.e., April, 1914). Vol. 7 made the mistake of making most of the seven plagues of Revelation correspond in the time of their outpouring with the numerical order of certain ones among the ten plagues in Egypt, but in some cases made no parallel between these two sets of plagues, where it should have been made.
(43) A page out of experience as clarifying the reason for the difference in the order among most of the ten plagues in Egypt and the order of the seven last
Exodus.
118
plagues as given in Rev. 16 is as follows: In the early spring of 1904, while we were spending a month at the Bible House at Allegheny preparatory to our entering the pilgrim work, we had many talks with our Pastor. Among others he offered us some suggestions as warnings against mistaken ways of presenting Truth as against error. He said that he never before the public used the expressions, trinity and immortality of the soul, in refuting those doctrines, because if he would so do, he knew that he would array the prejudices of church members against his efforts to help them. He said he would speak in favor of there being but one God and against there being more than one, that God could not be His own Father and at the same time be His own Son, and that a father and son could not be of the same age, etc. Then, instead of his expressly by name denying the doctrine of the soul's immortality, he would refute the idea that the dead were alive and conscious and prove that they were dead and unconscious. And, he added, by such methods he would, without raising the antagonisms of convincible orthodox hearers, give them the Truth, which in due time displaced the errors masking under the names of trinity and immortality of the soul. We profited by these suggestions, never expressly by name using the pertinent terms when, in our pilgrim work, refuting in public the errors involved in those terms. This suggestion of his also prompted us in the matter of antitypical Gideon's Second Battle to advise the brethren not to fight the term, immortality of the soul, but to refute the doctrine of the consciousness of the dead; and the understanding of the type also showed us the same thing as to one of the two things that should be attacked: Zalmunna—shade, or rest denied. It was, therefore, the Pastor's course on the subjects of the trinity and the soul's immortality, so far as public treatment of them was concerned, until quite late in the Harvest, to avoid attacking the trinitarian and human immortality doctrines in express term. But his later
Efforts at Deliverance.
119
open use of these terms in refuting their errors resulted in the plaguing of antitypical Egyptians, in the ninth plague, which came in the soul's immortality in 1911 (see B.S.M., Vol. 3, No. 4) and in the trinity early in 1914 (see B.S.M., Vol. 6, No. 4), though the fifth vial was poured out in 1899. Mr. Edison's remarks on the soul's immortality became the occasion of the former B.S.M. and the latter discussed Constantine as Trinity Maker. Thus from these examples it can be seen how the ten plagues of Egypt give the time order in which the plagues began to make themselves felt, while the time order of the seven last plagues corresponds to the time order in which they were poured out, regardless of when they began to make themselves felt. These explanations are offered as a transitional thought from Ex. 10:20 to Ex. 10:21, with which we take up the subject anew.
(44) The stubborn Pharaoh, reeling under the impacts of the first nine plagues, finally offered a compromise to Moses (see v. 24). This types Satan's being beaten into willingness to compromise matters with our Lord. As Pharaoh was willing to let all the Israelites go and serve the Lord ("Go ye … your little ones also"), but desired to keep back for himself all that they needed (the flocks and herds) for sacrifice; so Satan, beginning to offer the compromise, just after April, 1911, was willing to let all new creatures, even the most immature ("ye … your little ones") go free, only he wanted their humanity ("flocks" and "herds") left under his control. Both typical and antitypical Pharaoh wanted to make a compromise on the matter in dispute, viz., Israel's being permitted to go away into freedom from slavery and to serve the Lord, but being required to leave behind, in Pharaoh's control, the things indispensable to sacrifice. This compromise, however, was a dishonest subterfuge, because in type and antitype it nullified the proposal to serve Jehovah; for in the type the sacrifices required parts of the flocks and herds, and in the antitype the humanity
Exodus.
120
of the new creatures; for neither the humanity of the fleshly Israelites nor the new creatures of the spiritual Israelites could be sacrificed acceptably to Jehovah. Hence no real offer of freedom to serve the Lord was made in either case. This, then, reveals the dishonesty back of the proposals of both Pharaohs. From this incident we should thoroughly learn that there always lurks something deceitful in every proposal of Satan, and that his offers of compromise always in the end are calculated to leave him in full control, though at first their appearances seem fair enough on the surface. Neither of the Pharaohs had the right to offer the pertinent proposals, because the flocks and herds belonged to the Israelites, not to Pharaoh, and the humanity of the new creatures under God belonged to the new creatures, not to Satan, the oppressor.
(45) As in the cases of the previous conversations between Pharaoh and Moses, conversations between Satan and Christ are not typed, so in the antitypes of vs. 24-26 there were no conversations between Satan and our Lord. Here, too, the proverb holds, Actions speak louder than words. Hence by the various pertinent acts of Satan and the counter-pertinent acts of our Lord the conversation of Pharaoh and Moses recorded in vs. 24-26 was antityped. The antitypical ninth plague began to work just before April, 1911, when the intensified public work set in, and that largely against eternal torment and the soul's immortality, and later was increased by attacks on trinitarianism—the second and third of these subjects being the main plaguing subjects of Vol. 5—reinforced by the restitution message. Satan answered this antitypical ninth plague by creating a set of conditions conducive to slackness in carrying out of consecration and inimical to the making of new consecrations. This he did by ceasing for a while to place special obstacles in the way of consecration and by providing many diversions from consecrated living. We had as a rule less direct opposition to our public work during the twelfth hour than
Efforts at Deliverance.
121
during any of the other hours of the Harvest day. This favored indulgence in the flesh. Then with the ever increasing numbers coming into the Truth—largely of the Lot-and-his-two-daughters classes, a social—"fellowship"—spirit, as distinct from the sacrificial spirit, began to spread among the brethren under Satanic manipulation, which thing was calculated further to work against consecration. Then, too, he created worldly conditions—increase of opportunities of indulging in riches, pleasure, ease, etc.—which further tended to slacken the spirit of consecration. By his doing such things he made his offer of compromise to our Lord—antitypical of Pharaoh's offer of compromise to Moses as it is set forth in v. 24.
(46) Nor was this the first offer of compromise that Satan has ever made. Indeed, it is a favorite method that he has used from time immemorial in order to work out his ends. This can be seen, e.g., from the way he has given papacy its great power; for papacy's power grew step by step, first in the ecclesiastical, then in the political domain, through a continual encroachment on others' power by an ever continued series of agreements, based on bargaining, dickering. Modern diplomacy very largely has to do with such bargaining, dickering; and it was the papacy that introduced diplomacy. In ancient times it was not the custom of nations to have permanent embassies at the courts of the kings of other nations. Ancient Roman and Greek ambassadors would be sent out on a short mission to treat of one or two or three questions, which being disposed of, they would return to their own country; and only when other questions of interest would arise would another ambassador be sent out to negotiate on them. With the papacy matters went differently. Being on the alert to grasp continually for more ecclesiastical and civil power, the papacy sent out nuncios to various countries, where they would remain often for years and where they were to spy out conditions and use all opportunities to further papacy's ever growing
Exodus.
122
powers. Papacy was too shrewd to attempt to grasp for all power at one stroke. It gradually, and that largely by diplomatic compromises, increased its powers, never surrendering any once gained, and using each gain as a stepping-stone by diplomatic compromise to attain more gains, until it gradually drew to itself the supremacy, first in the ecclesiastical, then later in the civil domain. It was by this course that the papacy first invented, then made perpetual the art of diplomacy. And now through the accumulated experiences of nearly 17 centuries of diplomacy the papacy has at its beck and call the shrewdest diplomats—compromisers—in the world. Thus papacy fulfilled in part Dan. 8:25 on its making its policy prosper by craft.
(47) Pharaoh's proposal was rejected by Moses (vs. 25, 26), typing our Lord's rejecting Satan's offer by his pertinent acts to compromise on the matter of consecration. Moses' positiveness ("Thou must give us, etc."; "Our cattle also shall go with us; there shall not an hoof be left behind," vs. 25, 26) in refusing Pharaoh's offer to compromise types our Lord's positiveness in refusing to compromise in the matter. If Satan was shrewd in offering a compromise that actually would take back with one hand what had been offered by the other, our Lord was too wise to agree to compromise in the question in the slightest degree; for He saw through Satan's purpose in offering the compromise. Notice how Moses' refusal to compromise developed in greater positiveness as he continued to express the thought: "Thou must give us sacrifices and burnt offerings … our cattle also shall go with us; there shall not an hoof be left behind." This types our Lord's growing positiveness, by his acts, in rejecting Satan's offer to compromise in the premises. The herds were required by Israel because from them were to be taken the bullocks typical of our Lord's sacrifice. Satan's offer of compromise on their antitype involves the thoughts that the Ransom teachings and the resultant works of Christ on our behalf and our relations
Efforts at Deliverance.
123
to that sacrifice be left in Satan's power. The flocks were required by Israel for sacrifices typical of the Church's sacrifice. Satan's offer of compromise on the antitypes involves the thought that he would control the consecration and the consequent sacrificial acts of the Church. Of course, to concede to such a proposal would make useless the Ransom and the Church's share in the sin-offering; and, of course, such a compromise would have annulled Christ's whole Second-Advent work. Hence He rejected it with a positiveness that left no room to Satan for further argument on that line of thought and action. But the particular thing that Satan aimed at by his offer was the destruction of both the elective and free-grace features of God's plan; for if the elective feature of the plan, centering in the Christ, would go by the board, as the setting aside of the Ransom and the Sin-offerings would make it do, the free-grace feature of that plan would also go by the board. Moses' refusal to permit himself and Israel to be put into a position in which he and they might not be able to sacrifice ("thereof we must take to serve the Lord; and we know not with what we must serve the Lord until we come thither") types our Lord's not allowing Himself or Spiritual Israel to be put into positions that might prevent them from serving the Lord with their consecrated humanity.
(48) Having seen the acts and conditions whereby Satan made the offer to compromise the matter of Spiritual Israel's deliverance, we now desire to set forth the acts and conditions whereby the Lord Jesus made His answer. Of course, as above indicated, His answer was not made by words spoken directly to Satan, but by counteractive acts. And this was done by His occasioning an added emphasis to be given to the nature and requirements of Christ's and the Church's consecration, by the teachers of the Truth—the Lord's people, especially our Pastor, the pilgrims and elders. E.g., our Pastor's sermons of that time, 1911-1914, as they are given in the B.S.M. show the
Exodus.
124
great stress that then was laid on the nature and requirement of entire consecration, as the following subjects therein treated will show: A Holy [consecrated] Nation Pictured (Vol. 3, No. 6, June, 1911); Your Reasonable Service (Vol. 3, No. 7); Christ's Sacrifice Ignored (Vol. 3, No. 8); Love Not the World (Vol. 3, No. 10); Character Of Love Required Of Heavenly Aspirants, and, Ransom and Atonement (Vol. 3, No. 12); Saner Views On Baptism (Vol. 3, No. 13); Greatest Thing In the Universe, and, Making a Covenant With the Lord (Vol. 4, No. 2); Lovers Of Pleasure More Than Lovers Of God, and Faithfulness, The Great Character Test (Vol. 4, No. 5); Unfit for the Kingdom (Vol. 4, No. 6); Counting the Cost (Vol. 4, No. 8); Decline Of Faith and Godliness (Vol. 4, No. 9); Christ Died for Sinners, and, Fiery Experiences Necessary (Vol. 4, No. 11); Faith Salvation and Works (Vol. 4, No. 12); One Redeemer For World's Sin (Vol. 5, No. 6); The Best of Crowns and What They Cost (Vol. 5, No. 7); What Is Baptism? (Vol. 5, No. 9); So Run That Ye May Obtain, and, Laborers Together With God (Vol. 5, No. 12); Winning Christ—Losing All Else (Vol. 6, No. 1); Our Duty Toward The Truth (Vol. 6, No. 1); Why Jesus Died For Sinners, and, Good Seed In Good Soil (Vol. 6, No. 3); Sin Atonement (Vol. 6, No. 6). Thus did our Lord answer through our Pastor in the B.S.M. of the pertinent years Satan's offer of compromise.
(49) Certainly the pilgrims' talks of that period prove the same thing. We might on this point instance the courses of four lectures given by seven groups of four pilgrims in each group during 1913, called the serial lectures or meetings. These groups covered practically the whole country. The first lecturer of each group opened the series by a talk on Beyond The Grave. A week later the second one spoke on The Resurrection Of The Dead. The third one a week later spoke on Thy Kingdom Come; and the fourth a week later closed the series by a talk on Cross Bearing
Efforts at Deliverance.
125
—Consecration, made and carried out. And this, be it remembered, was not in parlor, but in public meetings; for very seldom before this period would the pilgrims in public meetings talk on consecration. Of course in parlor meetings the pilgrims and elders during that time spoke on consecration, even as at all other times. Thus, as the facts of this and the preceding paragraph show, at that period, 1911 to 1914, there was special emphasis placed on consecration before the public, which is the way our Lord made His answer, positively and emphatically refusing to compromise with Satan on the matter of sacrifice and sacrificing—on consecration and on the carrying out of consecration. In so doing He acted out the antitype of Ex. 10:25, 26.
(50) God's kindness in removing the ninth plague hardened Pharaoh's heart (v. 27), as His kindness at Pharaoh's requests, accompanied with the offers to let Israel go, if the requests were granted, occasioned the hardening of Pharaoh's heart at the end of each of the first eight plagues. But in addition to God's kindness in removing the ninth plague occasioning the hardening of Pharaoh's heart, we believe that Moses' refusal to compromise with Pharaoh on the matter of leaving Israel's flocks and herds with Pharaoh, if the people would be liberated, also contributed to the heart-hardening of Pharaoh after the ninth plague. A selfish and stubborn heart like Pharaoh's would be just the kind to become more stubborn, if a selfish and designing compromise wrung out of it by punishments should be rejected, as was the case in the present instance. Antitypically our Lord's refusal to accept the offer of compromise made by Satan made Satan all the more stubborn and bent on having his own way. He, therefore, strove all the more to keep Spiritual Israel in his control, by multiplying temptations, sins and sufferings for God's people from the time of our Lord's first refusal acts onward until they were completed and the tenth plague began to make itself felt for awhile.
(51) Unable to effect any compromise at all, Pharaoh resorted to threats (v. 28). The following is
Exodus.
126
the literal translation of Pharaoh's threat and Moses' reply: "And Pharaoh said unto him, Go away from me; take care for thyself; do not cause [thyself] again to see my face; for in the day of thy seeing my face thou shalt die. And Moses said, Thou didst say so; I will not again cause [myself] to see thy face any more." It will be noted that Moses did not say that he would not again see Pharaoh; for he did later see him again. By this remark we do not refer to Moses' conversation with Pharaoh as recorded in Ex. 11; for that chapter gives an account of the continuation of the interview between the two begun in Ex. 10:24; but we refer to their last meeting, which was sought by Pharaoh and not by Moses, as recorded in Ex. 12:31, 32. What Moses said, as indicated by the grammatical form of the verb used by him, was that he would not seek (cause [myself] again to see thy face) another interview with Pharaoh. And he kept his word. The tenth plague forced Pharaoh, contrary to his threat to kill Moses, if he would again set his eyes on Pharaoh, to ask Moses to come to see him again, without Moses' seeking it; and Moses went, not as a petitioner, but as God's agent to receive Pharaoh's unconditional surrender to God's demand for Israel relief. At their final meeting Moses said not a word; for he received Pharaoh's surrender in silence. Mark the difference between the brazen effrontery and boasting of Pharaoh's first response to Moses (Ex. 5:2) and the abject servility and abasement of his last remarks to Moses (Ex. 12:31, 32). Such must be the outcome with all who stoutly resist God's will and counsel. So let all Thy wilful enemies be abased, O Lord!
(52) What is the antitype of Pharaoh's threat? Of course the threat in the antitype was not verbally made. As in all the cases of the conversations between Pharaoh and Moses, the antitypes were fulfilled by acts, not by words. There must, therefore, have been certain acts performed by Satan conveying a threat of cutting off from a continuance in a public ministry shortly after it would commence, if such a public
Efforts at Deliverance.
127
ministry were again entered into by our Lord through His people. The ninth plague began to make itself felt shortly before April, 1911; for the sermon on the immortality of the soul that began that plague, and that appeared in the April, 1911, B.S.M. was preached and published in the newspapers shortly before that date and then subsequently published (i.e., April, 1911) in the B.S.M. Satan thereupon began to make his offer of compromise; for Jesus began to reject it in the June, 1911, B.S.M., in the sermon on The Holy Nation Pictured, as shown above. To make this thought clear we desire to remind our readers of a difference between the time succession in the enacting of serial types and in the enacting of their antitypes. In a type that runs through a series of acts each act in the series must be completed before its successor act begins. E.g., Elijah and Elisha had to cross Jordan before they began to converse beyond Jordan, as Elijah had to smite Jordan before they crossed it. But in the antitype, the pertinent acts covering periods of time, at times during that period antitypical Elijah could be smiting and at other times during that period he and antitypical Elisha could be crossing the Jordan and at still other times during that period they could be walking and talking beyond Jordan, as we have shown in P '32, 127, (23). The beginnings of the antitypical acts usually come in the same order as that given for the typical acts.
(53) So in this antitype, the darkness began shortly before April, 1911, and its last distinct feature set in with the preaching and publishing (in the newspapers) of the sermon, Emperor Constantine was The Trinity Maker, which was a little later published in the April, 1914, B.S.M., exactly three full years later than the beginning of the darkness, antitypical of the three full days of darkness (v. 22). Some time during the three days Pharaoh made his offer to Moses typical of Satan's compromising offer. The latter was begun quite shortly after the immortality sermon was published, because in B.S.M., Vol. 3, No. 6 (June, 1911), two months later, Jesus, in the sermon on The Holy Nation
Exodus.
128
Pictured, began to give His refusal to the offer of compromise. And, sure enough, but shortly afterward the threat of Satan was begun, about the middle of Sept., 1911 (B.S.M., Vol. 3, No. 11), in the Brooklyn Eagle's libeling our dear Pastor, which reached a climax in their cartoon published Sept. 23, 1911. Of course, this threat continued antitypically until Nov., 1916. Hence all of the persecutions, oppositions, misrepresentations and slanders brought against God's people between 1911 and 1916, calculated to annul their continuing new phases of public work that they might purpose to enter, are the antitypes of Pharaoh's threat to kill Moses if he would seek another interview with him. These four antitypes (the three years' darkness, Satan's offer of compromise, Jesus' rejection of it and Satan's threat) prove that serial antitypes do not, like types, have to wait for preceding ones to be completed before they can begin. It is important to keep this principle in mind with antitypes in general and with those under study in particular, if we are clearly to see their serial relationship to one another.
(54) Moses' answer (v. 29), "So didst thou speak," is equivalent to the expression, Yes, I agree. This is confirmed by what he added, "I will cause [myself] to see thy face again no more." Above we have shown the truthfulness of this statement, especially in harmonizing it with Pharaoh's and Moses' final interview, if Pharaoh's speaking and Moses not answering may be called an interview (Ex. 12:31, 32). It, therefore, remains for us to show the antitypical answer given by our Lord to Satan's threat. The answer of our Lord was made, not by words, but by His not instituting public meetings with new lines of thought after He would finish with those typed by the rest of this same interview with Pharaoh, which rest of this same interview is given in Ex. 11:4-8. Briefly, we would say that what Moses said in Ex. 11:4-8, as a continuance of his conversation with Pharaoh begun in Ex. 10:24, Ex. 11:1-3 being a parenthetical repetition
Efforts at Deliverance.
129
of former remarks, types our Lord's strictures against Satan's empire begun before, and kept up until 1916. Consequently no germanely new public message, i.e., containing new teachings not given the public actually or impliedly before Nov., 1916, no matter how much they reflected against Satan's empire, was a part of Jesus' messages to antitypical Pharaoh. The literature of Gideon's Second Battle, John's Rebuke and Elijah's Letter consists of teachings frequently stated expressly or given impliedly by 1916. This proves that much that was in Vol. 7, the millions propaganda and the rest of the "new views" perpetrated on the public by Levite movements, especially by the Society, are no part of antitypical Moses' message. They are not at all Jehovah's message to the public, but are Satanic counterfeits—Azazelian teachings of Little Babylon. Of course, what they give to the public now that was given by Nov., 1916, is Jehovah's message to the public. In the light of this, how filled with heavenly wisdom was our Pastor's statement to the effect that the Society should publish for the public only his own pen products! And how great errors have come to the public through the Society's disregard of this advice. These evils could have been avoided by the Levites' adhering to the will in this particular.
BEREAN QUESTIONS
(1) How much of Exodus has our study covered? Of what does Ex. 5 treat? What does it type? What is typed by Moses' and Aaron's going in to Pharaoh after first dealing with Israel? What are we not to understand their speaking with him to type? Why not? How are we to understand its antitype to have been performed? How does this fit in with the type?
(2) How were Moses' and Aaron's saying, "Thus saith the Lord," antityped? Their saying, "Let my people go"? Their statement of the object of the request? Its being for a happy celebration? Its being for God? Its being held in the wilderness? The request being made in the Lord's name? What would this have suggested to a fair-minded person, in type and antitype?
(3) Of what do vs. 1-5 treat? What does this fact enable us to do? What is typed by Moses' and Aaron's
Exodus.
130
arriving in Egypt? Their first work toward Israel? What do these two antitypes enable us to see? By what three publications was the first public work of the Harvest done, in a literary way? What other forms of service did the public work employ? Who were the pilgrims? The sharpshooters? What tract was volunteered? What two of these services was on a small scale? What one was in full blast? By what statements is this work typed?
(4) Of what three things did Pharaoh's defiant answer consist? What do these three things type? How did Satan not give these answers? How did he give them? What truths did Christ and the Church present from April, 1877, to April, 1878? What opposing errors did they at the same time refute? What did such preaching and pertinent desires constitute? What three things did the oppositional claims and course of the clergy, politicians and aristocrats do? What did they add to these three things? How did they not act in this? Who was their instigator? In what three ways was he so? What three things did Satan thereby actually do? What did Satan thereby do?
(5) When did these Satanic contradictions and obstructions set in? What bestowed these? Why? What had he for centuries done to the Truth? Between what years was he compelled to hear it again as a newly progressing thing? As a developed thing? What effect did his course not have? Did have? How and where is this typed? What does the word to meet mean in connections like Ex. 5:3; 4:24; Num. 23:3, 4, 15, 16? What is not, and what is implied in the words, "the God of the Hebrews hath met, with us"? How did they antitype these words? What is typed by the politeness of the typical request? Of what was this request the fulfilment? What new thing was added as a reason for granting the request? What did the addition type? What would have resulted in the antitype, if the symbolic journey were not undertaken and persevered in? How do 2 Thes. 2:9-12 and the six harvest siftings prove this, as to the antitypical pestilence? What' does the sword of v. 3 type? How did it act on the unfaithful?
(6) What is typed by Pharaoh's rebuking Moses and Aaron for arousing Israel to the desire for liberty? What effect in type and antitype did the rousing of this desire have? How was this effected in the antitype? In what
Efforts at Deliverance.
131
did it result? What typed it? How did this, type and antitype, affect Pharaoh and Satan? What did Pharaoh's charging Moses and Aaron to perform slaves' work type? Through what did he attempt to enforce this? What is typed by Pharaoh's blaming Moses and Aaron with responsibility for deterring Israelites and some others from labor? In addition to v. 5, what other Scriptures prove that this resting involved also others than God's typical and antitypical people? Through whom did the antitypical rebuke come? What induced thereto? How was it given?
(7) What do vs. 6-9 show? How did Pharaoh seek from his standpoint to remedy the situation? How did he think his means would effect his end? What antitypically did Satan first vainly seek to do? To what did he also during that time resort? For what were his measures calculated? Against whom did he set them into operation? On what did he depend for success? What is typed by the expression, "Jordan overfloweth all his banks all the time of harvest"? What proves this of the Jewish Harvest? How do we know it so far of the present Harvest? Of the rest of this Harvest? What in this respect characterizes this Harvest above all others?
(8) What are the antitypical taskmasters of v. 6? The officers of the people? What twofold thing did the typical and antitypical officers do? How do vs. 10-21 prove this? What are some examples of such reformers in the political, moral, religious and capitalistic worlds? What did they seek to do and actually accomplish? What does this prove? When did Satan's counteractive measures begin? What two things prove this? What are we not, and what are we to understand as to the duration of this Satanic policy? What pertinent peculiarity do antitypes and fulfillments of successive types and symbolic acts have? What illustrations prove this? What are the pertinent particulars in the pouring out of the vials? In what does this peculiarity not show itself?
(9) What does Pharaoh's charging the increase of the labors of Israel type? To whom was the charge, type and antitype, given? When and by what did he begin this in the political, industrial and financial world? By what did he increase the woes brought on by the gold standard? How was this so? To whom especially? Retributively what country is now suffering as a result? What other things exhibit the same oppression politically? What
Exodus.
132
effect have the reformers wrought? In what matters? Religiously how has this oppression been working since 1878? Among what three classes?
(10) What do the facts of the present Harvest prove on this subject? How is this manifest in the world of vice? Poverty? Education? In statecraft? In finance and industry? Labor? How does the historian Simonds summarize the situation nationally and financially?
(11) What facts show this oppression in family life? In the religious world? In what six general forms? What are some details under each of these forms? Among what three groups does this work oppression? How is it manifest in the world of "society"? What do all these facts prove? When did Satan according to the type begin this oppression? What has he since been doing with it? How has he been effecting it through people and conditions? Who thus, despite secondary agents, is the real oppressor?
(12) What is typed by Pharaoh's claim that the Israelites were lazy? What is typed by Pharaoh's cruelty in crushing Israel through increasingly rigorous labor? How were the antitypical taskmasters impressed into this service? The reformers? In what six ways was this done to them? What is typed by Pharaoh's charging the taskmasters and officers to dissuade the Israelites from listening to alleged deceitful words?
(13) What is typed by the taskmasters' and officers' going forth on their task? What does their speaking to the people not type? What does it type in each set of oppressors? How, for example, was this done in conservative and liberal religious leaders? Where else were similarly intentioned oppressions introduced? What is typed by the taskmasters and officers saying, "Thus saith Pharaoh"? By the statement, "I will give you no more straw"? By their charge, "Go, get you straw where you can find it"? By the statement, "Yet not ought of your work shall be diminished"? What purpose of Satan is thereby disclosed?
(14) What is typed by the scattering of the Israelites throughout Egypt? What is typed by the people seeking stubble instead of the withheld straw? The taskmasters' hastening the people? How is this evidenced? In what spheres? What is the driving power that demands the last ounce in this oppression? How do the forms of the curse act individually and mutually? What is typed by the beating
Efforts at Deliverance.
133
of the officers? What forms did this oppression take in the world of the reformers? What are examples of such in the financial, political, moral, trades union and socialist worlds? What did their own errors do to them? What Satanic policy is exemplified in this course? How was it traitorously manifested?
(15) What is typed by the taskmasters' demanding of the officers the reason for their not delivering the appointed number of bricks? By the yesterday? The today? What in this connection is to be remembered? To what have the reformers' sufferings moved them? How did they act in groups? By what are these public acts typed? Of what three things did they especially complain? What were the real oppressors? How were their complaints made? Of what were these complaints the antitype?
(16) What inference is to be drawn from the taskmasters' accusation and the officers' recital of their own sufferings? How does the antitype show this inference to be well taken? What do the words, "Wherefore dealest thou thus with thy servants" type? The words, "Thy servants are beaten"? What is a noted example of such oppression? What is typed by the officers' laying the fault on the Egyptians? What enables us to see that the officers type the reformers?
(17) What is the typical and antitypical relation of vs. 17, 18 to vs. 7, 8? How, in antitype of vs. 17, 18, did Satan give the answer? What is typed by the officers' recognizing their evil plight? In what two spheres and with whom is this failure seen? What is the relation of the second half of v. 19 to the second half of v. 11? What is typed by the officers' meeting Moses and Aaron after their interview with Pharaoh? What splendidly illustrates this? What was done with 100,000 copies of the extra edition of the Oct. 1, 1896, Tower? What did that Tower forecast as to the silver question? How did this affect the campaign? How did this move Mr. Bryan and others to act? Of what in part was this the antitype?
(18) What is typed by the officers' wish that God would examine and judge Moses and Aaron for their being alleged mischief-makers? What is typed by the involved thoughts suggested by their wish? In reality, into what presumption did the typical and antitypical officers become involved? Against what is their course a warning? What faults does v. 21 reveal, as in the typical and antitypical
Exodus.
134
officers? How should unpopularity with the wicked be regarded? What qualities necessary for obtaining the Truth does v. 21 show the reformers to have lacked? What is typed by the officers' saying that Moses and Aaron had put a sword into the hands of the Egyptians for their slaying? Whose case illustrates this? What other things are illustrations of the fulfilment of this type?
(19) What is typed by Moses' returning, and reporting his ill success, to Jehovah? By his sorrow over the developed situation? How did our Lord express the antitype of Moses' course in vs. 22 and 23? Despite forewarnings, why did both Moses and Jesus feel disappointed at the outcome? What do vs. 22 and 23 manifest to us? Particularly what things of our Lord do they bring to our minds and hearts? How do the cited Scriptures prove this? What experience hard to bear is here brought to mind? What lessons may we especially learn from vs. 22 and 23?
(20) How much of Exodus has our study so far covered? What do the last two verses of Ex. 5 present to us? What does Ex. 6:1-3 show? What was the first feature of God's encouraging typical and antitypical Moses? What did this imply to Pharaoh and Satan? What does the encouragement of Moses type? Why did the Father encourage our Lord? How would God meet Pharaoh's and Satan's counteractive measures? What is the language that types this? What advance knowledge does this language show Moses and our Lord at first to have lacked? When was it given them as knowledge in advance? What did this knowledge in advance do to Moses' and Jesus' grief over their pertinent Israel's oppression? What would God's strong hand effect in type and antitype? What is the difference in the type and the antitype between letting Israel go and driving them out?
(21) Why in type and antitype was repetition on God's speaking made? Why this emphasis? What does it type? What is typed by God's saying, "I am Jehovah"? How was this so? What contrast is made in v. 3? What does it type? What is the difference between the factual revelations of God in the Jewish Harvest and in the present Harvest? What special Divine attribute was active in the factual revelations of the Jewish Harvest? How is this Scripturally proved? In the factual revelations of the Parousia and Epiphany? How do they progress? Why were the factual revelations of the Jewish Harvest
Efforts at Deliverance.
135
typed by the name, Almighty God, and those of the present by the name, Jehovah? Where are details found on it?
(22) What allusions are made in v. 4? In vs. 5-8? In treating what verses were they typically and antitypically set forth? What does this make unnecessary? What will here be explained? What is the first of these items? What does this expression mean? In what were these things fulfilled typically? What are the antitypes? When will these be given in detail? What is the second of these items? What does its statement type? What is typed by the assurance that Israel would recognize that their God is Jehovah? What does the entire address of vs. 1-8 type? What should we learn from it? What noteworthy fact is hereby brought to our attention? How is this typed?
(23) In what did God say Israel would recognize Him as Jehovah? In what two aspects did He therein act toward oppressed Israel? What kinds of attributes therein manifested themselves? What antitypically should be our answer to the foregoing three questions? What characteristic have the involved assurances? Of what do they assure the Church? The world? Of what are these the antitype? What is typed by the oath (Gen. 22:16-18) made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob? What has this oath done to us? Especially under what circumstances? What is this oath-bound promise to us? What was God's adding here to the promise the expression, "I am Jehovah," to do in the type and the antitype? What really is the guarantee? What should come to God for it? From whom?
(24) What is typed by Moses' telling Israel the declarations of vs. 1-8? What seven doctrines especially are involved with others in Jesus' declaring the antitypes of vs. 1-8? Of what was His giving these the antitype? In general, through whom did He speak them? In particular through whom? What was our Pastor made in 1879? What was the first flood of light given him as such? Where and under what type is this explained historically? What characteristic could the unfolding of this antitype be said to have? What was the nature of Israel's reception of Moses' message of v. 9? Why was this reception given to Moses' message? What do these words deserve? What do they imply? What does this type? What characterized the Truth work of April, 1878, to Oct., 1880? To what does this remark not refer? How do we prove
Exodus.
136
that there were begettals during this period? How is the remark of v. 9 not related to this fact? To what does v. 9 refer antitypically?
(25) What antitypically wrought the unfruitfulness of Moses' message to Israel as a repetition of the contents of vs. 1-8? What expectation did the brethren cherish for Nisan 16, 1878? Wherein was it right? Wherein wrong? How do the citations prove this expectation to be the brethren's? How was the proclamation of this expectation made? In what two things did the mistaken forecast result? How did Bros. Barber and Russell differ in their stand on this expectation? What did Mr. Barber then inaugurate and maintain? What effect did these two things have on antitypical Israelites, begotten and unbegotten of the Spirit, outside the Truth? What errors kept other antitypical Israelites temporarily out of the Truth? How did they act toward Jesus' message at that period? How did the increased oppression in the form of sin affect the weak and the halting? What type does all this fulfill? Comparatively, which condition, the typical or the antitypical, was the sadder? Why?
(26) What did God do during this involved period? Why do we apply this charge to refer antitypically to public Harvest work? How did Jesus and the Church act toward this charge? With what results? What character did these results give that period of the Harvest? What two characteristics did Moses' statement before the Lord have? From what standpoint did it seem unanswerable? Why? What is the difference in the expressions, "Jehovah spake to Moses" and "Moses spake before the Lord"?
(27) What does this difference imply antitypically? In whom was our Lord's pertinent activity reflected? How was the speaking before the Lord done in antitype? On what principle? Especially to whom? Why with antitypical Israel not harkening should we expect Satan then to have harkened? What is meant by Moses' saying he was of uncircumcised lips? What kind of an ambassadorship did Moses have to exercise toward Pharaoh? What do these things type? What result did this certaintee, so far as moral suasion is concerned? What had to be added in type and antitype to secure the release? What, antitypically, is implied in the dual form of the Hebrew word
Efforts at Deliverance.
137
for lips? How are vs. 10-12 and 29 and 30 related? Why is there a repetition here? As what is Ex. 6:14-27 to be regarded? What does it enable us to recognize? With what are Ex. 6:10-12 and 28-30 to be connected?
(28) What is typed by God's charging Moses and Aaron toward Israel and Pharaoh on Israel's deliverance? When was this charge given? What did Jesus do through that Servant in way of preparing to fulfill this charge? When were they prepared, put through the press and ready for distribution? How did the first of these rank as a piece of Harvest work? What order and plan was used in their distribution? Why not another, and why this order? How did these two works stand related to Jehovah's charge of v. 13? Where is the type of the first of these works set forth? What is deferred to the consideration of Ex. 7:8-13? Why are the genealogies of Ex. 6:13-27 placed parenthetically between these charges and their execution with pertinent instructions? What does, and what does not clarify the placing of the genealogies here?
(29) What will help us to see the setting of the antitypes of the genealogies? What has been done on this point before? Where in this section is it especially stressed as evidence on this point? How does this section prove it? Quote and explain vs. 26, 27 on this point. How do their expressions stand contrasted with Moses and Aaron in other parts of the 40 years' experience from leaving Egypt to the entrance of Canaan? Why are the pertinent, definite and limiting expressions inserted here? What do they prove of the antitypes of the pertinent types? What does this fact enable us to do? What secondary application is not thereby excluded? Why not? Where and how was the secondary application made? For what do the above remarks prepare us?
(30) What fact in this genealogy should first be noted? How many of Israel's tribes are here treated genealogically? What second striking thing does this genealogy present? What is, and what is not the character of these omissions? Why are only those genealogies given that are found in vs. 14-25? What are first given in these genealogies? In what way? Who are represented here by Reuben? By Simeon? Why do we so hold?
(31) What have the Epiphany Merarites done to the Epiphany Camp? When will they do more? After what experience of theirs? What type shows this? How?
Exodus.
138
What will the Epiphany Gershonites after their cleansing become and do? Along what lines are the divisions of these Epiphany Levites made, in antitype of the divisions of Reuben and Simeon? For Epiphany purposes, whom does Hanoch (Enoch) type? Pallu? Herzon? Carmi? Where, and among whom, are the Epiphany Gershonites active? What are they not yet doing? For Epiphany purposes, whom does Jemuel type? Jamin Ohad? Jachin Zohar? Shaul? What is probably typed by Shaul's having a Canaanitish mother?
(32) What tribe's genealogy is next taken up? Why will our description of them be brief? Who are the Epiphany Gershonites? Merarites? Kohathites? Where are they, as well as the three groups of Levites in other periods, described? Whom does Levi type? What are the two groups of Epiphany Gershonites? Who type them? Who are the Epiphany Amramites? Izeharites? Hebronites? Uzzielites? Whom does Kohath type? The Mahli Merarites? The Mushi Merarites? Which group of the last named is now most active? What do they have and control?
(33) Whom does Amram in v. 20 not type? Why not? Who were, and who were not the heads of the Amramites? Whom does Amram in v. 20 type? In what capacity and for what reason? What does Jochebed mean and type? What addition to the expression, "his father's sister," do the Septuagint, the Vulgate and the Syriac make? Why is this addition to be favored? What woman's name is omitted from the genealogy in the A. V.? What authorities include it here? Whom in this connection would she type? Into what three divisions have the antitypical Izeharites formed themselves? What types this? What divisions have the Sturgeonites formed? What types this? How is this the case with those who never were Menta Sturgeon's adherents?
(34) What does Aaron mean and type here? What does Elishebah mean and type? Whom does her son Nadab type? Why? Abihu? Why? Eleazar? Why? What were his antitype's services and powers? Ithamar? Why? His services and powers? What are the three divisions of the antitypical Korahites? In what respect does Eleazar type our Pastor? How does his son Phinehas type our Pastor? How was he developed into antitypical Phinehas? What does Phinehas mean? How did this name fit our
Efforts at Deliverance.
139
Pastor antitypically? What of Eleazar's wife is not known? What likely is thereby typed? What is a summary of Ex. 6:14-25?
(35) What have we sufficiently done with vs. 26-30? What was the occasion of this? In what has this resulted as to the end of our study so far? What will we do with the section from Ex. 7:14 to 10:24? Why so? Why will we here, nevertheless, treat of the tenth plague? What remark should be made on the first plague? How does it differ from the third sign? Why should this be called to our attention? What other separate acts, though much alike, should we not identify? Why not? Why are the above remarks made? If they are not kept in mind, what contradiction would be made between two thoughts of our Pastor? How in numerical order do the three woes and seven last plagues of Revelation not stand toward the ten Egyptian plagues?
(36) What does God in Ex. 7:1-7 do? Of what is this typical? What had hitherto not been granted to Moses? Comparatively how had his power hitherto been? What is implied in his having been made a god to Pharaoh? How did this affect Aaron's power? Why so? What did Moses' power inferior to Pharaoh's type? What kind of power, type and antitype, had formerly been used? How did this affect Pharaoh and Satan? From when on in the antitype did God change this condition? What did this change involve in God's use of Jesus? When had Jesus received this increase of power? How did He act toward it for about a year? When did God begin to hint to this effect? What expression conveys this hint? What did our Lord begin in Sept., 1881? What is implied in the charge that Moses declare all God told him? What should Aaron thereupon do? What was, and what was not the character of that which Aaron was to say to Pharaoh? What was the antitype of the charge to Moses? The antitype of the implication of that charge as to Aaron? The antitype of Aaron's charge to, not request of, Pharaoh? What was the antitypical demand?
(37) What assurance did God in this connection give Moses? How did God harden Pharaoh's heart? What effect resulted for God from such hardening? What are the antitypes of these three things? What was Jehovah's statement to Moses respecting His course toward Pharaoh's disobedience? What did it type? What did Jehovah
Exodus.
140
tell Moses would be the effect of these judgments on Egypt? What is the antitype of this? What is typed by Moses' and Aaron's doing what God had just commanded them? How many brothers financed this work? In what proportion did they give? What did the smaller giver feel and do when he learned the amount of the larger giver's contribution? What supplemented the public distribution of Food For Thinking Christians? How was the related work done privately, among the brethren? What is typed by Moses being 80 and Aaron 83 years old when exercising power over Pharaoh?
(38) What charge does God give Moses and Aaron in vs. 8 and 9? What Hebrew word is, and what Hebrew word is not used to designate what Aaron's rod became on being cast down before Pharaoh? What does nachash mean and in which related passages is it used? How is taninim (plural of tanin) mistranslated in Gen. 1:21? How do Rotherham and Young translate it? How is this word Biblically used in Gen. 1:21? What are some illustrations of these taninim? What is the usual translation of taninim in the Bible? How did rationalists regard them? How have the Bible allusions to them been vindicated? What is the name and length of the largest so far found? What seems to be the right translation in Ex. 7:9, 10, 12? How do tanin's other Biblical occurrences read? How are they applied? Who especially is thereby designated in the Old Testament? What else is so designated there? What does Revelation say on these? Why is the crocodile more than likely meant by the taninim of Ex. 7:9, 10, 12? Why would it be most effective in impressing Pharaoh?
(39) What did the charge of vs. 8, 9 type? What did the antitype of Aaron's changing his rod into a tanin require of the Church to do? What was the explanation of evil's permission given by the Church? How was the charge antitypically fulfilled? In private, among the brethren? What is typed by Pharaoh's charge to his wise men, magicians and sorcerers? What is typed by Jannes' and Jambres' casting down their rods? By Aaron's tanin swallowing their taninim? What was the effect of the whole scene on Pharaoh and Satan? What fact of experience is proved by this effect? What did God in type and antitype do as to this effect?
Efforts at Deliverance.
141
(40) Who does not, and who does give the names and nationality of two of Pharaoh's magicians? What suggests their nationality? What do the words Jannes and Jambres mean? What does this account of Jannes and Jambres prove as to the times of the antitype? Whom does Jannes type? Jambres? What two applications did our Pastor make of these two magicians? What application did he not give? Why not? Who gave it? How? What other two sets of double types convey the same general phenomena? Whom does Nadab type? Abihu? Moses' and Aaron's smiting the rock twice? How do the pertinent Moses and Aaron antitypes compare with the Jannes and Jambres antitypes? How do these compare with the Nadab and Abihu antitypes?
(41) Why has there been an interruption in the continuance of this chapter? With what did the discussion end? What was said as to Ex. 7:14—10:20? What are described in that passage? Why is a consideration of this section here omitted? When is it purposed to be taken up? What is the first reason why we will here study the tenth plague? The second reason? What peculiarity as to the execution of the third woe is found in the book of Revelation? With what do the events following the ninth plague begin?
(42) Which one of the Revelation plagues corresponds with the ninth of the Egyptian plagues? What proves this? What difference in order do we find in the Egyptian plague and the plagues and woes of Revelation? What determines the order of these in Revelation? In Exodus? Give an example proving this. What mistake on this line is found in Vol. 7? What in some cases does it omit?
(43) What experience shows why there is a difference in the time order of some of the ten plagues of Egypt and of the seven last plagues of Rev. 16? What was the instruction of this experience? What view of that Servant kept him back from express public attacks on the trinity and soul's immortality doctrines? In what year was this course begun to be changed on immortality? On the trinity? In what articles and B.S.M's. were these subjects discussed more plainly to the public? How do these facts make clear the difference in the time order of the plagues from the Exodus and Revelation standpoints?
(44) What were the two cumulative effects of the first nine plagues on Pharaoh? What do they type? When
Exodus.
142
did the antitype begin? Of what did the compromise—type and antitype—consist? What was its first wrong characteristic? Why so? Why was it also unjust? What in reality did the compromise offer? What lesson can we learn from this offer as respects all Satan's offers? Who did not, and who did have the rights in the matter on which the compromises were offered?
(45) What are not typed by the conversations between Pharaoh and Moses? How were these conversations antityped? What, briefly, was the antitypical ninth plague? When did it begin to work? By the emphasized spread of what two teachings did it work? How did Satan answer the antitypical ninth plague? By what two things did he make conditions inconducive to consecration? To what two features of consecration did he do this? What classes coming into the Truth at that time furnished Satan with a further way of making his offer on compromising on consecration? How was this the case? What other set of conditions did he then create, so as to make compromises in consecration possible?
(46) What is one of Satan's favorite methods to secure his ends? In what institution of Satan is this exemplified? How did papacy's power grow? What is the special characteristic of modern diplomacy? Who introduced such bargaining? What was the custom of ancient nations with respect to their ambassadors' stay at the courts of other nations? What custom did papacy introduce in this matter? Why? How would its nuncios act while in the countries to which they were accredited? What did it gradually accomplish? How? What art did papacy thereby invent and perpetuate? What has it thereby developed? What prophecy did it in part thereby fulfill?
(47) What did Moses do with Pharaoh's proposal? What did this type? What did Moses' positiveness in his refusal type? In what did the matching of our Lord's and Satan's wits in this matter result? Why did our Lord reject Satan's offer? What characteristic of Moses' answer grew in strength as his answer continued? How was this shown? What does this type? Why did Israel require the herds? What was involved in Satan's wanting the antitypical herds for himself? Why did Israel require the flocks? What was involved in Satan's wanting the antitypical flocks for himself? In what first thing would acceding to Satan's desires in these respects result?
Efforts at Deliverance.
143
Second thing? What did Christ's answer effect? What was the particular thing that Satan sought to gain by his offer? Why would such a result follow acceding to his demand? What is typed by Moses not permitting himself and Israel to be put into a position in which they could not sacrifice?
(48) What did Jesus do as to Satan's compromise offer? By what did He not answer? By what did He answer? How did He make the answer? Through whom did He do this? In what did our Pastor's part therein appear? Name some of the pertinent subjects that appeared in the B.S.M. of 1911 (Vol. 3). Of 1912. Of 1913. Of 1914. What do these facts prove?
(49) Through what other Truth servants also did He answer Satan? In what special course of lectures did this happen? What is meant by the serial lectures? How many lecturers took part in each series? How many sets of serial lecturers officiated? In what year was this done? What were the topics of the serial lectures? What was the subject especially through which Jesus gave the pertinent answer to Satan? Where were these lectures not delivered? Where were they delivered? In what other kinds of meetings was the pertinent subject stressed? By whom? What do the facts adduced in this and the preceding paragraph prove? What antitype did our Lord thereby fulfill?
(50) By what did God primarily harden Pharaoh's heart in this instance and in other instances? By what did He secondarily do so? Why was this a natural effect? How was the antitype of this fulfilled? How did Satan react in this hardening of his heart? How long did this continue?
(51) To what did Pharaoh then resort? What is the literal translation of Pharaoh's threat? And of Moses' answer? What did Moses not say? What proves this? How do Moses' remarks in Ex. 11 stand related as to occasion to the events of Ex. 10:24-29? How do facts corroborate the real statement of Moses? How did Moses go to Pharaoh at their last meeting? What is the difference in Pharaoh's carriage at his first and his last interview with Moses? How did Moses receive Pharaoh's surrender? What should be expected to be the outcome of every stout resistance to the Divine purpose? How may we pray as to such an outcome?
Exodus.
144
(52) By what was the antitype of Pharaoh's threat not made? By what was it made? Of what character must these acts have been? When did the ninth plague begin to make itself felt? What proves this? How long after that plague began was it that Satan began to offer his compromise? What proves this? With what sermon did Jesus begin His rejection of Satan's offer? How must the series of acts that constitute a serial type be enacted? How does the enactment of a serial antitype take place? Why are these two answers right? Give an example in illustration of these two thoughts? Where did we first show this distinction in the enactment of types and antitypes?
(53) When did the antitypical darkness begin? When did its last distinct feature set in? How did these two features in time fulfill the time features of the type? When did Pharaoh make the typical offer to compromise? When was the antitypical offer to compromise made? What implies this? When was the antitypical refusal to compromise begun? By what was the antitypical threat begun? When did its beginning come to a climax? What constituted the antitypical threat? How long did it last? What do the four antitypes of vs. 21-28 prove as to serial antitypes? Why should the principle underlying this feature of serial types and antitypes be kept in mind?
(54) To what was the first part of Moses' answer equivalent? What confirms this thought? How is the truthfulness of Moses' statement to be harmonized with his seeing Pharaoh again? How was our Lord's answer not made to Satan's threat? How was it made? Where is Moses' interview with Pharaoh continued? In what way are the verses of Ex. 11:1-3 connected with this interview? What do Moses' words in Ex. 11:4-8 type? What conclusion are we to draw from this fact? What pieces of literature do not come under this condemnation? Why not? What features of propaganda do come under this condemnation? Of what are they not a part? What are they? What is the character of the message that the Levites give the public that was given by 1916? In the light of these facts what is to be said of the provision in our Pastor's will forbidding the Society to give out to the public other publications than his pen products? What evils resulted from its disregard? How avoid these?