Epiphany Truth Examiner


View All ChaptersBooks Page


Num. 5; 6 


IT HAS been our privilege to expound in the preceding chapters Num. 1-4 and 26, from the standpoint of the type and the Gospel-Age antitype. In this chapter we trust to give, by God's grace, Num. 5 and 6 from the standpoint of the type and the Gospel-Age antitype. We believe that these seven and all other chapters of Numbers type also Epiphany and Millennial things; but we desire in this book on Numbers to emphasize the Gospel-Age antitypes. It will be recalled that we have pointed out that the Most Holy's corner boards, which are visible to the extent of one of their thirds from the Most Holy, type the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. It will also be recalled that in the same article it was stated that one of the Most Holy's pillars types Jesus as a Divine being and the book of Revelation as of His authorship, and that another of these pillars types St. Paul as a Divine being and the epistle to the Hebrews as of his authorship. From this standpoint, the relation of the book of Hebrews to the books of Exodus and Leviticus makes us think that the pillar representing it stood on the same side of the Most Holy as the corner boards that typed the books of Exodus and Leviticus. And because the book of Revelation sustains a similar relation to the books of Numbers and Deuteronomy, we believe that the pillar representing the book of Revelation stood on the same side of the Most Holy on which the corner boards stood that typed the books of Numbers and Deuteronomy. Therefore the understanding of the antitypes of the things recorded in Numbers and Deuteronomy is of greatest importance to an understanding 



of the Revelation. It is for this reason that we are in this volume expounding Numbers 1-14 and 26, and we, by grace Divine, perhaps in another volume will expound the Gospel-Age antitypes of the rest of Numbers. If it should fall to our lot to give the Church an exposition of the Revelation, these antitypes will be found very helpful as a preparation of the Church for a better appreciation of it. 

(2) In Num. 5:1-4 the three classes of Gospel-Age sinners who were to be disfellowshipped are typically set forth. They are typed by the lepers, those having an issue and those unclean by contact with the dead. The lepers types those New Creatures who lost their crowns, but not life, the individuals who will find themselves before the throne. That the lepers type the Great Company in their uncleansed condition, we construe from the type of Aaron (the Little Flock) and Miriam (the Great Company) faulting Moses (Jesus) (Num. 12:1-16; see the next to the last chapter of this volume). Those with an issue type willful sinners, usually those of the Second Death class; because their infirmity was one whereby vitality, life, was leaving them, thus antityping those who lose life, though in some cases these do not type Second Deathers (Lev. 15:2-15). Those defiled by the dead type justified ones who have become contaminated by more or less gross sin. When we look at the New Testament teachings we do find that they command us to withdraw our fellowship from uncleansed Great Company members (1 Cor. 5:1-5, 13); the Second Deathers (2 Tim. 3:5, 8); and the justified ones who impenitently give themselves to gross sin (1 Cor. 5:11; comp. Rom. 12:1). Thus not only the symbols used in Num. 5:1-4, but also the direct teachings of the New Testament show that we are to withdraw fellowship from the uncleansed Great Company members, Second Deathers and impenitent sinners among the justified. The withdrawal of fellowship is typed by the expression, "put out of the camp" in vs. 2 and 3. In v. 3 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


the reason for this step is given by the Lord: "that they defile not their camps in the midst whereof I dwell." The presence of the antitypes of such people among the real or nominal people of God in the Gospel Age gives them an opportunity to contaminate with their defiled condition those not thus defiled and thus to dishonor God, who dwells among them. By such disfellowshipment the Lord who dwells among His people is glorified, and they are safeguarded from contamination, while if those sinners remain among the Lord's people in full fellowship, they will contaminate others and dishonor God. The children of Israel's (v. 4) obeying this charge types the fact that during the Gospel Age such sinners were disfellowshipped by both the real and the nominal people of God, e.g., not only the true Church has disfellowshipped them, but also all denominations have regulations in their church laws covering such cases and have enforced them. Thus we see the fulfillment of the type of Num. 5:1-4. 

(3) In vs. 5-10 the Lord types, as far as concerns the Gospel Age, how its sinners should make restitution for their wrong-doings. In the type the charge was given that people should right the wrong that they committed by confessing the wrong-doing and giving the equivalent back, with 20 per cent. added, to the wronged person, or, if he no more lived, to his heir—next of kin (v. 7); but where this could not be done, the recompense should be made to the Lord at the hand of the priest together with the trespass offering (v. 8). For the Gospel Age, making good to the wronged party would mean that its sinners should acknowledge their wrongs to the Lord always and usually to the wronged party, but not when the wronged party would be injured or not benefited by the confession; and that they should make restitution to the extent of their ability. We say that confession should usually be made to the wronged party. There are times when only evil would result from such a confession, e.g., when a husband or wife has been



unfaithful, it can only injure the innocent party to know it; therefore we believe in such a case the confession should be made not to the wronged spouse, but to God alone. Making restitution in the type antitypes first that the wrong-doer undoes his wrong to the extent of his ability, e.g., if he has stolen or otherwise unjustly gotten the possessions of his neighbor, he should repay the principal and add as much more to it as is necessary to work the evil out of his own character; or if he has misrepresented another, he should recall his statements to all to whom he made them and should give the wronged person as good a certificate of character as he is able, etc. The 20 per cent., a multiple of 10, stands like 10 and its multiples, for full ability in natures lower than the Divine. Therefore it types that we are, in addition to undoing the wrong, i.e., restoring the principal, to add as much as we can to work the evil out of our own characters. 

(4) In the type if the wrong was of such a kind that it could not be made good to the wronged party or his heirs, then the sinner was to make it good to the Lord by giving to the priest the principal and 20 per cent. added (v. 8). This seems to type the thought that we are to root out of our characters the wrong qualities that led us to commit the sin in question, and make our characters as much better than they were before as we can, and do it as something that would honor God and benefit our Lord. Indeed, every reformat1ory act of ours honors God; for it repairs injury done to His image in us, and it benefits Christ as our High Priest; for it assists Him in His work of cleansing our characters. The ram of atonement (v. 8) types our Lord's sacrificed humanity—His merit. The sinner bringing the ram to the priest for his atonement represents us as coming to God in faith in Christ's merit, pleading for forgiveness on the basis of that merit; and the priest's making atonement by the ram of atonement for the wrong-doer represents our Lord's 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


imputing of His merit for the forgiveness of our sins, and thus satisfying God's justice on our behalf. 

(5) Three distinct things, from among those that were brought by the people to the temple service (v. 9) are spoken of as belonging to the priest: (1) the heave offerings, (2) the hallowed, i.e., consecrated things, and (3) the gifts for the priest. While treating of the heave offerings it might be well for us to mention and explain briefly, type and antitype, all the sacrifices: (1) the sin offerings, (2) burnt offerings, (3) peace offerings, (4) meat and drink offerings, (5) wave offerings, (6) heave offerings and (7) free will offerings. The sin offerings typed the humanity of Christ and the Church as working atonement. The burnt offerings represented these same sacrifices from the standpoint of their manifested acceptableness to the Lord. The peace offerings represented them from the standpoint that they were offered as a matter of covenant obligation assumed by Christ and the Church. The meat and drink offerings represent these sacrifices from the standpoint of the praise and worship that they bring to God in that they are offered by a declaration of His attributes in preaching His plan in its deeper (meat) and simpler (drink) truths and by a service of Him in advancing His plan. The wave offering represents the same sacrifices from the standpoint of their continuity unto a completion and their elevation of the offerer's character. The free will offering represents that their humanity is freely, without constraint, offered up to God. And the heave offering represents that their humanity in its sacrifice yields honor unto God. This honoring of God is typed by heaving, i.e., raising or exalting repeatedly the shoulder of the sacrifice heavenward by the priest. The heave offering, as a part of the sacrifice consisting of the right shoulder (Lev. 7:32; Num. 6:20), types the proper conduct—the shoulder, being a part of an animal's forelegs, in harmony with Scripture symbolism representing right conduct—of the sacrificer 



as honoring God and Christ. Many other things, gifts like tithes, firstfruits, etc., given to the priest, are also Scripturally called heave offerings (Num. 18:27, etc.). The heave offerings, hallowed things and gifts of vs. 9 and 10, for Gospel-Age purposes, therefore, represent the honors, services and joys that reforming sinners render Christ by their reformation and good conduct. Such honors, services and joys God desires Christ to have. 

(6) From v. 11 to v. 31 certain Gospel-Age persons—denominational churches and the true Church in their relation to Christ, as His espoused—are typically set before us in the type of a wife, suspected of unfaithfulness to her husband and subjected to the test of a Divinely enjoined ordeal. Heathen ordeals and those which in the Dark Ages were practiced in Christendom always put the disadvantage on the accused. They required, e.g., the victims to walk on burning coals, through flaming fires, to put their hands in boiling water, etc. If the victim was unburnt, uninjured and made no outcry, he was accounted innocent; but if he was hurt, injured or made an outcry, he was declared guilty, upon the theory that the gods or God would preserve the innocent harmless and painless, but would cause the guilty to suffer harm and unbearable pain! Of course, the whole principle on which such ordeals were based was wrong—a tempting of God in reality. But the only ordeal that the Bible commanded contained no such unreasonable elements as these. In the ordeal of Num. 5:11-31, God agreed to work a miracle injurious to the guilty only, with no miracle at all to be wrought with the innocent during the ordeal, though, if necessary to make her fruitful, it would have been done. And when we see the antitype of this story, we will at once recognize the marvelous figure that the Lord wrought in connection with the ordeal now under consideration. 

(7) First we will make a few general explanations, type and antitype; then we will proceed to an explanation, 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


type and antitype, of the details of Num. 5:11-31. In this account we understand that the husband represents Christ as prospective Bridegroom; the suspected wife represents, if guilty, the denominational churches, if innocent, the true Church; the priest represents Christ as High Priest; and the ordeal represents the crucial tests put upon the denominational churches and the true Church to determine whether they have been loyal or not to Christ as the Heavenly Bridegroom. But one might object to the above setting of the antitypical Bridegroom that in the type the man is spoken of as the woman's husband, while in the antitype the marriage of the Lamb is not due until the end of the Age. To this objection we answer: In Israel the espoused as well as the married were considered man and wife (Gen. 29:21; Deut. 22:23, 24; Matt. 1:20, 24). Therefore the law under consideration applied both to the espoused and to the married in Israel, and hence could very properly apply antitypically as given above. Again, it may be objected that the denominational churches are not espoused to Christ. To this we answer that each denominational movement began as a Little Flock movement and each denominational church contained members of the Little Flock after it became a sect, and all of them, as a whole, according to Rev. 1:20, compare with Rev. 2 and 3, were by God recognized tentatively as the Church, and as such as His mouthpiece up to 1878. Hence the propriety of the denominational churches being recognized by Jesus as His espoused until in crucial trial unto a completion they were proven guilty of unfaithfulness on account of symbolic fornication with earthly institutions. And finally, some might object that it is unreasonable that Christ could be represented both by the husband and by the priest during the ordeal. To this we reply: In other types Christ from varied standpoints has been represented by two persons acting different parts in the same general transaction; hence there are for the above-suggested 



setting Scriptural precedents. E.g.: In Num. 3:5, 9, 10, Moses represents Christ as God's Executive, and Aaron represents Him as High Priest. In Deut. 31:22, 23, Moses represents Christ both as Executive and as the Revealer of God's will, i.e., Prophet, and Joshua represents Christ as the Captain of the Lord's army. Thus the above setting has Biblical analogy in support of its propriety. 

(8) Having seen these generalities, let us now proceed to the details which we will find in perfect harmony with the setting "of things as given in the preceding paragraph. In vs. 12-14 there are set forth the circumstances under which the ordeal described in this section should be applied. It was not to be applied to a wife caught in the act of adultery; for in such cases the law prescribed stoning (Deut. 22:22-24). It was to be applied to such wives of whom the husbands were suspicious, and from such suspicion became jealous, regardless of whether their wives were guilty or innocent; for the ordeal was appealed to in order to reveal their guilt or innocence. Antitypically we understand the guilty wife to represent the denominational churches which have committed fornication with the kings—the governmental, clerical and aristocratic organizations—of this earth, by becoming one with them in unholy alliances (Rev. 17:5, 15-18; 18:3, 9; 19:2). The innocent wife types the true Church, which maintained her virgin purity by remaining separate from all worldly alliances, waiting in symbolic chastity for her complete union with her Lord at His Second Advent (2 Cor. 11:2, 3; Rev. 19:7, 8; 21:2, 9-27). The fact that the typical husband did not know whether his suspicions were true or not types the fact, not that our Lord does not know whether symbolic fornication has been committed, but that He acts as though He did not know it, and therefore arranges to put her under crucial tests applied by God for an unanswerable demonstration of the guilt or innocence 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


of His espoused. The spirit of jealousy coming over the husband types our Lord's zeal for the symbolic chastity of His espoused and His not being satisfied with her without requiring and receiving its proof (v. 14). 

(9) The husband's bringing his wife to the priest types (v. 15) our Lord as prospective Bridegroom bringing the denominational churches and the true Church to Himself as the High Priest; because as such He is God's Agent in disclosing the guilt or innocence of the suspected one. The offering that the husband brought, consisting of flour, was a meat offering, even as v. 15 in the Hebrew calls it twice minchas—meat offering. It being a tenth of an ephah—a tenth being a fraction in which the number ten is involved—represents that this offering was as much as power less than Divine could give. As we have seen, the meat offering types the worship and praise given to the Lord. To worship means to serve, and to praise means to reflect credit on someone. We serve God by advancing His plan, and praise Him by declaring His Word, which reflects credit upon Him—praises Him—in that it manifests His glorious wisdom, power, justice and love. Thus the meat offering represents our advancing God's plan and declaring God's Word—ministering to and spreading the Truth; hence the barley flour represents the Truth given by Christ to the denominational churches and to the true Church. To each denominational church a special truth has by Christ been entrusted, faithfully to administer as its stewardship. Thus to the Greek Catholic Church the doctrine that there is only one person in our Lord, as God's vicegerental Agent, to the Roman Catholic Church the doctrine that there is only one Church, to the Lutheran Church the doctrine of justification by faith alone, to the Reformed or Presbyterian Church the doctrine that the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper represent the body and blood of Christ, to the 



Baptist Church the doctrine that consecrated believers alone are to be baptized—immersed—etc., were committed. These doctrines are typed by the barley flour. The Parousia and the Epiphany Truth is the antitypical tenth of an ephah of barley flour given to the true Church in her ordeal, which has been given to her for six testful experiences—siftings—since 1874 and will continue with her while the Priests and the Levites are being completely separated as such. 

(10) The fact that no oil was to be poured on the flour, and the fact that no frankincense was to be put upon it are likewise typical. Oil, among other things, types the spirit of understanding (Matt. 25:1-12). Frankincense types praise, virtue. Thus the gold, frankincense and myrrh that the magi brought to the child Jesus (Matt. 2:11) type the fact that the Faithful will bring their sacrificial sufferings (myrrh), their praises, virtues (frankincense), and their Divine (gold) New Creatures, as their best gifts to Christ. Similarly, the frankincense placed upon the shewbread types praise, virtue, the fruit of the Spirit, founded upon God's Word and developed in the Priests as they partake of the antitypical shewbread—the Word of God. There being no oil in the meat offering presented in the ordeal service types the fact that no denominational churches nor the true Church would have the spirit of understanding as to the significance of the special trial connected with the antitypical ordeal while it was going on; and there being no frankincense upon the meat offering types the fact that no new or increased virtues will be added to the offerer during the antitypical ordeal. In other words, there would be no increased knowledge or grace worked in the churches and the Church during the antitypical ordeal—they will have only what they had previously developed and had, as their support throughout their trial, which was to test them for their past acts along the lines of past attainments or lack of attainments; 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


even as at school we were tested in our examinations on our past work and attainments, and were given therein no new things and attainments. This is the reason for withholding the oil and frankincense from this ordeal meat offering, and the meaning of the expression (v. 15): "for it is a [meat] offering of (1) memorial [past privileges], (2) bringing iniquity to remembrance,"-literally, bringing to mind iniquity, i.e., revealing past conduct. And, certainly, from experience we know this is true. None of us knew what the six siftings meant before we had been proven true amid them; nor did any of us add new graces to our characters while in the crucial trial of any of those siftings; but our past attainments were sorely tested therein. Thus in these siftings we offered the antitypical meal without antitypical oil and frankincense. 

(11) The expression of v. 16, "The priest shall bring her near, and set her before the Lord," has the same general meaning as we found in Lev. 16:20: "He [Aaron] shall bring the live goat near." It meant in the type that the priest undertook in connection with her to put her publicly into the position of one that was to undergo the ordeal in God's presence as a part of the Divine arrangement for such cases. In the antitype it means that the denominational churches and the true Church were put into such public circumstances connected with the Lord's service as brought them to the Lord's special attention for the purposes of putting them through the antitypical ordeal. It therefore meant their being publicly manipulated into such relations, circumstances and experiences as would favor their being put under the Lord's special observation into the crucial tests that would reveal their past course as to worldly affiliations and alliances. This will become clearer by several illustrations. When the Catholic Church was about to enter her crucial trials involved by the reformation through individuals in the 14th and 15th centuries, 



through the conflict between Philip the Fair of France and Pope Boniface VIII a very public situation was created in religious respects [before the Lord], which later enabled Marsiglio to be the instrument of the Lord to test the Catholic Church crucially. Similarly, when the same kind of a testing was ministered through Wyclif, the shameless monetary exactions of the popes and begging friars in England and the conflict between contending claimants to the papal chair, furnished the setting for the antitypical ordeal in that it brought the Catholic Church prominently before the Lord and the public along these lines. Again, when the time came for Huss to be used as the Lord's instrument in applying the antitypical ordeal to the Catholic Church, the conflict between the reforming clerical party and the papal court culminating in calling the councils of Pisa, Constance and Basel furnished the situation that brought the Catholic Church "near and set her before the Lord." And back of all these circumstances was our Lord as High Priest manipulating the circumstances to create just such situations—bringing her near and setting her before the Lord. The same general features mark the situations when the Catholic and Protestant sects received their ordeals in the Reformation by sects, as also the same general features mark the circumstances that led up to the six siftings of the Parousia and Epiphany. 

(12) The holy water that the priest put into an earthen vessel (v. 17) was taken from the laver; for that water was "holy"-consecrated to the Lord. Such water we understand to type the Truth (Eph. 5:26; Heb. 10:22), and that pertinent to the subject at hand. The earthen vessel into which the holy water was placed represents those "secondarily prophets" whom the Lord used as the special servants giving the truth applicable for the test, like Marsiglio, Wyclif, Huss, Wessel, Luther, Zwingli, Hubmaier, Servetus, Cranmer, Browne, Fox, Wesley, Stone, Miller, etc.

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


The dust from the floor of the tabernacle types the facts of Church History (Vol. III, Chap. II) pertinent to the teaching applicable to each case. Mixing it with the water types the fact that along with the presentation of the pertinent Scriptural teachings the facts of Church History would be used to show the history of the true doctrine and right practices, and of the false doctrine and the wrong practices as corroborative evidence of the innocence or guilt of the one undergoing the antitypical ordeal. 

(13) For sake of emphasis the statement of v. 16, "set her before the Lord," is in substance repeated here in v. 18. Covering the head implies that the person so covered is in subjection. Thus in the Church meetings the sisters wear a head covering to symbolize that as the representatives of the Church they are subject to the brothers as representatives of Christ, i.e., the Church is subject to Christ; while the brothers have their heads uncovered to symbolize that they as the representatives of Christ are free from subjection to the sisters as the representatives of the Church, i.e., Christ is the Head of the Church (1 Cor. 11:1-16). For the woman under the ordeal to have her head uncovered would fittingly represent what we know to be a fact in trial—the Lord permits each one to do just as he pleases; and each one in the trial actually does what he pleases, i.e., does just what his previously developed heart and mind will prompt him to do. Consequently those who developed the selfish and worldly heart and mind will, as their will, fulfill the desires of self-will; and those who have developed the Lord's heart and mind will, as their will, fulfill the desires of the Spirit (Gal. 5:16-18). The uncovered head of the guilty women would therefore type the fact that the denominational churches in the antitypical ordeal were given freedom to exercise their own free wills, which, through their developed selfish and worldly dispositions, made them manifest in the trial teachings and



practices contrary to the Lord's mind and heart. And the uncovered head of the innocent woman would therefore type the fact that the true Church in the antitypical ordeal was given freedom to exercise her own free will, which, through the developed spiritual mind and heart, prompted her to manifest in the trial teachings and practices harmonious with the Lord's mind and heart. Certainly history demonstrates such opposite exercise of their free wills to mark the denominational churches and the true Church during the antitypical ordeals; and this we believe shows our application to be Scriptural, reasonable and factual. 

(14) V. 18 also tells us that the priest put the meat offering, both as a memorial offering and as a jealousy offering, in the woman's hands, before the ordeal. This suggests the thought that to each denominational church Christ gave its special truth, and to the true Church the Parousia and Epiphany Truth, for administration and service, before the ordeal; and, during the ordeal it serves as (1) a reminder of past privileges (memorial offering), and as (2) a revealer of past conduct (jealousy offering). This can be seen plainly in the history of each one of the denominational churches and of the true Church as having taken place. E.g., the Roman Catholic Church before each one of her ordeal experiences stressed the doctrine of there being but one Church; the Lutheran Church before its ordeals stressed the doctrine of justification by faith alone, etc., and during the ordeal as a reminder of their past privileges and as a revealer of their past conduct. So the true Church during the Parousia was given the opportunity to stress before each ordeal connected with the five Parousia siftings the Parousia Truth, and during the ordeal as a reminder of past privileges and as a means of revealing past conduct. The same is true of her in the Epiphany so far as its ordeal has advanced. Not so to have done would have been contrary to the thought of bringing an antitypical 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


meat offering suitable for the Lord's altar. To do so would be fulfilling the picture given us of the woman before and while she was subject to the ordeal proper. 

(15) V. 18 supplies still another item—the priest held in his hand the earthen vessel containing the water called, because of its effect on the guilty, "the bitter water that causeth the curse." Like every other feature of this chapter, this item is also typical. We have already seen that the vessel represents those "secondarily prophets" whom the Lord uses as special mouthpieces and through whom He gives the Truth and its Church History corroborations that reveal the guilt or innocence of the antitypical woman undergoing the antitypical ordeal. For the priest to hold this vessel in his hand implies that it was in his possession and power for ministering the testing and revealing water. His so holding this vessel types that our Lord Jesus holds such "secondarily prophets" in His possession and power for ministering the testing and revealing Truth and facts from Church History pertinent to the particular denominational church or true Church in the ordeal. This thought is, among other thoughts, included in the symbols of Rev. 1:16, where our Lord is represented as holding in His hand the seven stars. We say that it is, among other thoughts, included in the thoughts of this verse, because this verse covers all the uses that the Lord has made of those symbolized by the seven stars, and these uses are broader than simply employing them to minister the testing and revealing truths during the antitypical ordeals. Our Lord holding these "secondarily prophets" as the antitypical vessel in His hand, implies that He protects, strengthens, enlightens and uses them efficiently to accomplish their intended service in connection with the antitypical ordeal, as well as directs, etc., other features of their work, teaching the Truth apart from ordeals and directing the general work of the Church in its other phases.



(16) Vs. 19-22 show how the priest put the woman under an oath by which she solemnly agreed to accept the issue of the ordeal as the Divinely given proof of innocence or guilt, accordingly as the issue would be favorable or unfavorable, v. 19 showing that no harm would come to the innocent, and vs. 20 to 22 showing that the guilty would become a curse and oath among her people, i.e., an outcast and an object of execration, when manifested as guilty by the swelling of her belly and the shrinking (not rotting) of her thigh. Her saying, "Amen, amen," is her consent under oath to accept the issue of the ordeal as revealing her true character. Putting the woman under oath to accept the issue of the ordeal, and that as the Divinely directed proof of guilt or innocence, types the fact that our Lord as High Priest so manipulated circumstances when accusations of disloyalty to the Heavenly Bridegroom were made against the denominational churches and the true Church, that they were led solemnly to appeal to God as the witness of their innocence and to agree to stand test revelatory of innocence or guilt, binding themselves solemnly to abide by the issue of the ordeal and to accept vindication, if innocent, and condemnation, abhorrence, avoidance and execration by sister churches and the true Church, if proven guilty. Certain it is that every, denominational Church and also the true Church under accusation of disloyalty to the Heavenly Bridegroom were necessitated solemnly to deny the charge, appeal to God as the revealer of their condition as to the charge, and bind themselves to accept the issues of any test the Lord would bring upon them to manifest their guilt or innocence. This can be seen, e.g., in the strenuous denials of disloyalty that were made by the Catholic Church under accusation, her appeals to God as her vindicator and her agreement to abide by the decision He would reveal, during the reformation by individuals and that by sects. The same things can be seen

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


in the course of the Lutheran Church, the Episcopal Church, the Presbyterian Church, etc., as it can be seen by the course of the true Church, both in the Parousia and the Epiphany sifting ordeals. 

(17) It will be noticed that the innocent woman was assured that she would be unharmed by the ordeal; for the curse of the ordeal would come upon the guilty only. No miracle would be required to keep the innocent woman free from the curse, because the natural effect of drinking the water would not be the curse; for the curse could be effected by a miracle only. Consequently by this ordeal God agreed to work a miracle in the form of a curse to reveal the guilty. The curse affected not only primarily the person of the guilty, but also secondarily the esteem in which she had been held by her kinsfolk. If the woman was guilty, her belly was to swell and her thigh was to fall away, i.e., shrink (see margin), so that she would henceforth limp. The translation "rot" is not correct here. All this of course is typical. No harm befalling the innocent woman types how the true Church would emerge from her crucial tests unscathed. When we look at the course of the true Church during the five completed siftings of the Parousia and during the incomplete sifting of the Epiphany, we will recognize that this has been true. Though sorely tested in these five ordeals, she emerged from every one of them uninjured; and by the time the sixth sifting is completed, she will have been found to be uninjured, even as we find her uninjured during the features of the sixth sifting that are already in the past. 

(18) But not so with the denominational churches, every one of whom has committed symbolic fornication with the political, clerical, or aristocratic kings of the earth, i.e., the political, clerical, or aristocratic institutions, like governments, clerical organizations, orders of nobility and aggregation of capitalists. In that these churches united with any one of these for any 



reason whatsoever, they became disloyal to the Heavenly Bridegroom, and thus symbolic harlots, as they are expressly called in the Scriptures, especially in the Revelation. Not only is the guilty woman a type of these churches, but her primary punishments—the swelling of her belly and the shrinking of her thigh—are also typical of their untoward experiences. We will first consider the swollen belly. We understand it to represent corrupting of doctrine. This will become apparent if we remember that in Scripture, teachings are symbolically called food (Heb. 5:12-14; Rev. 10:9, 10; Is. 55:1, 2; 65:13, 14). Our foods go to, and are digested in, the belly. Hence by the figure of metonymy—the container for the thing contained—the belly in this passage is put for the corrupting food which caused the swelling to set in. Hence the swelling belly types the corruption of doctrine setting in as a result of the antitypical ordeal. Thus the Truth and facts of Church History that the Lord Jesus through His special mouthpieces gave to the pertinent churches at the time of their ordeal, coming in contact with the teachings held by these churches, turned them into more and more corruption and thus caused disease to spread throughout the teachings of these churches, even as the typical water corrupted more and more the contents of the woman's belly and made it swell. 

(19) A few illustrations will clarify this. For example the Scriptural teachings on justification by faith alone-corroborated by facts of Church History-that the Lord Jesus gave through Luther, the earthen vessel, to bring into contact with the papal teachings on justification, occasioned such corruption of teaching in the papal system of doctrines that almost all her teachings were given a falser cast in order to evade the refutative Truth teachings on justification. So, too, when the Lord used Zwingli as the earthen vessel to present, as against Luther's false doctrine of the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the bread and 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


wine, the Truth on the Lord's Supper—that the bread and wine are merely symbols of Christ's body and blood, which were not really present in the Lord's Supper—the Truth on this subject not only led Lutheran theologians to deeper corruptions on the doctrine of the Lord's Supper, but also on other matters, e.g., it led them to teach as a basis for the real presence in the Lord's Supper the monstrous doctrine that now Jesus' humanity has the Divine attributes communicated to it, so that, e.g., His humanity is everywhere present; also to teach the doctrine that Water Baptism and the Lord's Supper actually and inherently confer the grace of forgiveness of, and cleansing from, sin. Thus the symbolic belly of the Lutheran Church swelled, when the pertinent Truth was brought into contact with her errors. Again, when the Truth was given by the Lord Jesus through Robert Browne that elders and bishops were not the rulers of the ecclesias, but that each ecclesia under the Lord was to direct her own affairs—the Truth that the Lord gave to Congregationalists to conserve—the Episcopal Church that hitherto had made very little of Episcopal ordination and almost nothing of Apostolic succession, in contradiction began to develop the error of exclusive Episcopal ordination and the Apostolic succession of its bishops. Thus its symbolic belly swelled—its comparatively mild errors on these subjects became more and more corrupt, diseasing its whole theory of the church. These illustrations will clarify the antitype of the swelling belly. 

(20) The second part of the primary curse was the falling away—the shrinking—of the thigh. As her belly swelled, the guilty woman became very unsightly; but when as a result of her shrunken thigh she limped, she became all the more unsightly, and of course was unable to conceal her guilt, which was plainly manifest from her physical deformities. With the loose fitting oriental clothes it was possible measurably to hide the swollen belly, but not to conceal the



limping walk of the guilty woman. In the symbols of the Bible, walking represents conduct, character; and the upright walk represents righteous, and the limping walk, unrighteous conduct and character (Ps. 26:11; 56:13; 78:10; 84:11; Prov. 2:7; Jer. 6:16; Nah. 2:5; Rom. 8:1, 4; Eph. 4:17; Phil. 3:18; Is. 35:6; Heb. 12:12, 13). We therefore would understand that the antitypical shrunken thigh types the unrighteous conduct that has marked every denominational church in the antitypical ordeal. Several illustrations will make this manifest. When the Lord Jesus put into John Huss as the earthen vessel the Truth on the nature of the Church—that it consists of the faithful elect, invisible to man but known to God—and through him brought this teaching in contact with the Catholic error that the true Church was the Roman Catholic hierarchy, not only was the Catholic Church in defense of her view led to resort to various false teachings in support of her false doctrine on this subject—the swollen belly; but also in order to put aside Huss' teachings, to burn him and his ablest supporter, Jerome of Prague, at the stake, the Council of Constance, as the official assembly of that Church, ordering them thus to be burned; and to seek by force of arms through Sigismund, the Emperor, to destroy Huss' followers, as such, in Bohemia, in some very cruel and unjust wars. Thus her antitypical shrunken thigh was manifest. 

(21) Another example of the antitypical shrunken thigh we find in the way Servetus was treated by the Reformed or Presbyterian Church. When the Lord Jesus placed in Servetus as the earthen vessel the Truth refutative of trinitarianism, and when this refutative teaching came in contact with the Reformed leaders, Oecolampadius, Capito, Bucer, Calvin, Beza, Bullinger, Farel, etc., they not only rejected it and resorted to fresh doctrinal twists to evade its refutative force; but those who survived until Servetus' second

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


literary attempt to set forth the Truth, about twenty-three years after the first literary attempt, i.e., Calvin, Beza, Bullinger, Farel, with the backing of Reformed theologians elsewhere, under the lead of Calvin, first betrayed Servetus to the Catholic Inquisition, from whose sentence to the stake Servetus escaped only through a timely flight from prison, then afterward at Geneva had him burned at the stake under exceptionally cruel circumstances, because of his anti-trinitarian teachings. Thus the Calvinistic Church in its ordeal experienced the swollen belly and the shrunken thigh. These examples will suffice to show how the denominational churches under ordeal of crucial trial underwent the antitypical belly-swelling and thigh-shrinking. 

(22) V. 23 shows how typically the priest wrote the curses of the ordeal into the book, i.e., the book of the law, and then with the water of the earthen vessel wiped the ink (so written in the book) into the water in the earthen vessel; for the statement literally is "and shall wipe [it] into the bitter waters." This was to show the woman that the curses were in harmony with the Law of God (shall write them in the book), and would with justice be mingled with the waters. Antitypically, our High Priest set forth these curses as harmonious with the Law of God, and has justly caused them to mingle with the pertinent truths and corroborations from Church History in the earthen vessel used with the pertinent antitypical guilty woman. As examples of these curses in the Lord's Word, we may cite Rev. 2:20-23; 3:15-17; 6:8, compare with 13:10; 17:1-6. We know from experience and observation both in the Parousia as far as the denominational churches were concerned and in the Epiphany as far as the Great Company sects are concerned, that the Lord put such "ink" of the curses into the Truth and facts of Church History into the antitypical earthen vessel in His hand. 



(23) The priest's causing the woman to drink the waters (v. 24) types our Lord's manipulating the pertinent truths in such ways as to bring them to the attention of the various denominations and the true Church at the time of the antitypical ordeal of each one. The water's becoming bitter to the guilty woman types how distasteful to the denominational churches and to the Great Company sects of the Epiphany the truths that oppose their errors became to them at the time of their ordeal. 

(24) But before (v. 26) the waters were given to the woman to drink, the priest took the meat offering from the woman's hand and waved it before the Lord (v. 25), typing how our Lord would use continually (wave) in the Lord's service the special truths given to the denominational churches and the true Church as their stewardship. The fact that the denominations have mistaught on some subjects does not imply that the Lord would not use the truths that they did have and teach. For a long time using them as His mouthpiece (Rev. 2:8, 10; 3:16), He of necessity served—used those teachings for—the Lord's cause by the administration of these truths, and His long and rightly doing this is typed by the priest's waving the woman's meat offering before the Lord. His bringing it near (literal translation; only a handful was offered, see v. 26) to the altar (v. 25), represents our Lord as pointing out their relation to the Sin-offering as He administered such truths in the advancement of God's cause. The antitypes of this verse were in each case begun before the ordeal proper—the drinking of the water—was entered into. Hence the type (v. 26) states that the priest did that service before the woman drank the water. 

(25) The priest's taking a handful of the meat offering (v. 26) as the memorial proper—typing that feature of the pertinent truth which was kept right and that assisted to bring out the fidelity or infidelity of

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


the antitypical woman, hence typically called "offering of memorial" (vs. 15, 18), represents our Lord's making a full and powerful use of such truths in the Lord's service. The priest's offering this as a perfume (literal rendering) to the Lord, types our Lord's offering to God through such truths a very acceptable sacrifice, He doing the sacrificing work as Leader and Director of the members of His body, who co-operated with and under Him in the pertinent sacrificial work. Such a service was indeed a sweet smelling savor unto the Lord (2 Cor. 2:14-16; Rev. 8:3-5). 

(26) The woman's drinking (v. 27) the water types the denominational churches and the true Church taking note of and studying the testing truths set forth before them by our Lord through the pertinent servant at His disposal at the time in question. The guilty woman swelling in her belly and limping in her thigh, types the thoughts already explained above. Her becoming an oath and a curse to her people, her kinsfolk—the secondary curse—types how each denomination after being proven guilty of infidelity to the Heavenly Bridegroom, through her progressing in false teaching and committing added wrong acts, has become an object of solemn abhorrence and avoidance (the oath) and of deep execration (the curse) to the Lord's people, real and nominal, who eschew those particular forms of her symbolic fornication. Not only the true Church and many denominations eschew the fornication of the Catholic Church, but, e.g., the true Church and the Congregationalist, Unitarian and Baptist churches eschew the Episcopal and Presbyterian churches, because of the fornication involved in their union of church and state in certain countries and in their union with the clericalistic institutions of Episcopacy and Presbyterism. 

(27) The Lord in vindication of the innocent woman, not only preserved her from the swollen belly, the limping thigh and the shunning and execration of 



her kinsfolk, but positively blessed her with motherhood (v. 28)—a thing especially desired by Israelitish wives in hope of their becoming the mother or at least ancestress of the Messiah. This was also typical, shadowing forth that the true Church would emerge from her trials not only free from the blame of infidelity, but from the bane of false teaching and wicked practices, and in due time from the abhorrence, avoidance and execration of others, but also fruitful in grace, knowledge and service. If we attentively consider how she emerged from each' one of the five siftings of the Parousia, it will be recognized that after each one she became very fruitful in knowledge, grace and service. The same thing is now partly true, and will eventually be fully true after the sixth sifting is over, as now we also see the Great Company sects with swollen bellies and shrunken thighs, and, as such, objects of abhorrence, avoidance and execration to the Faithful, in proportion as these at this incomplete stage of the sixth ordeal see the actual conditions. 

(28) As the type made the ordeal described in this chapter obligatory ("this is the law, etc."—vs. 29, 30) on the jealous husband to require it, and on the suspected wife to submit to it, so Jehovah requires our Lord to test all churches claiming to be His espoused as above indicated, and requires every church to submit to this antitypical ordeal. And as the typical husband who fulfilled this law was absolved from guilt as well as the innocent wife, and as the guilty wife bore her iniquity (v. 31), so in the antitype. Jesus as Bridegroom, according to Scripture (Rev. 2:20-23) and in harmony with the facts of Church History, some of which have been given above, faithfully fulfilled the antitype of this law as respects the husband and priest. Accordingly, He stands before God as a worthy and honorable Bridegroom and Priest. The true Church, according to Scripture and history, has fulfilled and is fulfilling her part in this antitypical

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


law, and therefore stands approved as a worthy and honorable Espoused. But each one of the denominational churches and each one of the Epiphany Great Company sects, while keeping this antitypical law is Scripturally and historically demonstrated as unfaithful, in that it has experienced and is experiencing the swollen belly, shrunken thigh and abhorrence, avoidance and execration of those not guilty of its particular form of symbolic fornication. 

(29) Our study of six chapters of Numbers, in harmony with St. Paul's statement in Heb. 3 and 4, corroborates the thought that Fleshly Israel in Numbers types Spiritual Israel in the Gospel Age. The rest of Numbers is, among other things, also typical of Gospel-Age matters. It will be noted that the above applications are Scriptural, factual and reasonable, and in these qualities are quite different from the presentations so frequently made by the Levites, who seem to be suffering from an irresistible itch to rush into print, regardless of the unreasonableness of their views. How fully their effusions and conduct prove them to be swollen in belly and shrunken in thigh in their advancing into deeper darkness and in their wrongs against the Epiphany-enlightened saints, as the latter are serving the Lord's Truth now due for those to understand who have been faithful to the Lord, the Truth and the Brethren! May the Lord keep us faithful, and then will we be, after the ordeal and in each of its phases, fruitful in knowledge, grace and service. 

(30) We have above pointed out the fact that the pillar in the Most Holy typing the book of Revelation, being over against the board typing the book of Numbers, represents the thought of the relation of these books to one another, and implies that the main things symbolized in Revelation are typed in Numbers. The seven churches of Rev. 1-3 in their activities symbolize the real and nominal people of God in their activities, just as the twelve tribes and the tribe of Levi in Num: 1-4 



and 26 do in their activities. As the harlots of Revelation symbolize the unfaithful churches, so does the unfaithful spouse in Num. 5. As the chaste bride of Revelation symbolizes the true Church, so does the chaste spouse of Num. 5. As the bridegroom of Revelation represents our Lord, so does the bridegroom of Num. 5. And as the seven angels of the seven churches symbolize the Lord's special mouthpieces throughout the Gospel Age, so do the male Nazarites of Num. 6 type these same servants of the Truth. Our study of this chapter will serve to bring out this thought, and will thus be another evidence of the close relation between Revelation and Numbers. 

(31) For a number of reasons we understand that the Nazarites type the servants of the Truth that God places in the Church for its upbuilding in grace, knowledge and service (1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11-13). That the Nazarites type special consecrated persons is evident from the fact that they were taken out of a consecrated nation, and by a special and added consecration ("When either man or woman shall make a special vow, the vow of a Nazarite, to separate himself unto Jehovah," Num. 6:2, A. R. V.) were set aside unto the Lord; even as the Truth servants of the Church are taken out of a consecrated spiritual nation, and by a special and added consecration are set aside to serve the Body of Christ as its official servants. Their bringing a sin offering (v. 14) as distinct from a trespass offering proves that they type persons who share in the Gospel-Age atonement sacrifices, i.e., Priests; while their bringing a ewe lamb as distinct from a male lamb, proves that they are but a part of the second Sin-offering, even as the female is represented Scripturally as being a part of the male (Gen. 2:23; 1 Cor. 11:7, 8, 12). Furthermore, the Nazarite's bringing no leavened loaf (Lev. 7:11-14) with his peace offering (vs. 15, 19), proves that he does not type Millennial persons; while his not bringing an 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


unleavened cake (Lev. 8:26) with his oiled cake and anointed wafer, proves that his particular kind of consecration types one that occurs in certain ones after they participate in that one typed in Lev. 8 as the priestly consecration, even as the special consecration of the servants of the Truth in the Church occurs after their priestly consecration. These reasons prove that the Nazarites type the servants of the Truth set by the Lord in the Church for its upbuilding (Eph. 4:11-13), i.e., the apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers—brethren separated by the Lord from the rest of the brethren, as their Divinely appointed teachers and servants, but not lords. A study of Num. 6 will show in detail that this understanding is correct. We will now proceed to such a study. 

(32) V. 2 shows us that there were both male and female Nazarites. We understand the male Nazarites to type the same persons as are symbolized by the seven angels of the seven churches, i.e., the twelve apostles and those of the "secondarily prophets" who have been the Lord's special eye, mouth and hand in their times—brethren like Polycarp, Irenaeus, Arius, Claudius of Turin, Berengar of Tours, Abelard, Peter Waldo, Marsiglio, Tauler, Wyclif, Huss, Wessel, Savronarola, Luther, Zwingli, Hubmaier, Servetus, Cranmer, Browne, Fox, Wesley, Stone, Miller, Russell, etc. The female Nazarites type (1) those of the "secondarily prophets" who were not the Lord's special eye, mouth and hand, like Mark, Luke, Barnabas, Titus, Timothy, Apollos, Silas, etc., in the Jewish Harvest and the pilgrims during our Pastor's day, (2) evangelists and (3) pastors and teachers. Our reason for so understanding the antitypes of the male and female Nazarites is because the Scriptures represent the female as the "weaker vessel," and the female Nazarites would, therefore, fittingly represent the less influential-powerful-servants of the Church, while the male Nazarites would fittingly represent the more 



influential—powerful—servants of the Truth. The word Nazarite means one separated or consecrated. The A. R. V. properly translates this verse, and by its wording shows that the vow of a Nazarite was a special vow—"shall make a special vow—the vow of a Nazarite." A vow itself implies consecration (Ps. 116:12-14), and a special vow would imply one that only special consecrated ones make, and this is just what our understanding of the antitypical Nazarites implies. 

(33) Before entering into a discussion of v. 3, we desire to remark that after the second verse there is no more express reference to female Nazarites, which is confirmatory of our understanding that the male Nazarites type the seven angels of the seven churches, i.e., the apostles and those "secondarily prophets" who have been the Lord's special eye, mouth and hand; for the relation of the book of Numbers to Revelation implies that the former refers to the same general things as the latter. Hence it should, among other things, give some details on the seven angels of the seven churches, which it does by describing their types in Num. 6 after v. 2. But while after v. 2 there is no reference made to female Nazarites, we are to understand that in the type the same general prohibitions and commands applied to them as to the male Nazarites, as is indicated by the connection between vs. 2 and 3, and that, accordingly, the same general antitypical prohibitions and commands have applied to their antitypes. 

(34) Three things were prohibited the typical Nazarites: (1) indulgence in the direct or indirect products of the vine (vs. 3, 4); (2) cutting off their hair (v. 5); (3) defiling themselves by the dead (vs. 6-9). These three typical prohibitions, in harmony with Scriptural symbology, very fittingly represent three things prohibited all the Lord's people, but especially prohibited the servants of the Church—the apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. A

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


summary of the first prohibition is typically set forth in v. 4 when it says, "All the days of his separation shall he eat nothing that is made of the grape vine [literally, wine vine], from the kernels even to the husk." What does this grape vine represent? Certainly it does not type Christ, our Vine (John 15:1-8); because as such the servants of the Truth, as branches of that Vine, would be incapable of eating therefrom, though as such they imbibe Its sap, which the Lord instead of prohibiting them gives them for their growth. But there is a vine other than the Vine of the Father's right hand planting, eating from whose products is prohibited all the Little Flock, but especially its servants—the vine of the earth (Rev. 14:18, 19). Everything made from, or produced by, this vine of the earth—the counterfeit kingdom of God—is prohibited the servants of the Truth, because it would effect their misleading the Lord's people, who look to them for spiritual teaching and help. Therefore, the servants of the Church should beware of accepting anything that is characteristic of, produced by, or derived from, the vine of the earth. 

(35) Certain details of these prohibited products of the vine of the earth are given in v. 3. Seven of such details are mentioned in this verse, all of them very significant for the antitype and confirmatory of our understanding that the Nazarites type the servants of the Truth in the Church. Of these seven details, the first four are grouped separately from the last three. The first four items in the first thing prohibited are wine and strong drink and vinegar of wine and vinegar of strong drink. Wine as a symbol, just like the vine, is in the Bible used in both a good sense and in a bad sense. In a good sense it symbolizes joy-producing truths, especially ethical truths—truths pertaining to good conduct and character—when used in connections with corn as symbolical of doctrinal Truth (Is. 25:6; 55:1; Joel 2:19; 3:18). In a bad sense it



symbolizes error, especially ethical error when used in connection with strong drink (Rev. 14:8; 17:2, 4; 18:3; Is. 28:1, 7). In Is. 28:1-7, we are given a description of the clergy of Christendom drunk with ethical and doctrinal errors, under the symbols of the leaders of Ephraim drunk with wine and strong drink. Accordingly, we understand the wine of Num. 6:3 to mean ethical errors, and the strong drink to mean doctrinal errors. As ethical errors we might point out the Roman Catholic teachings that divorce is never permissible, that persecution for dissent from papal doctrines, organization and practice is a good work, etc., and the Protestant teachings that the participation of the consecrated in war is right, and that to promote the reformation of people by legislation is a part of the Church's present work. Papal and Protestant doctrinal errors are so patent as to require no illustrations. By the vinegar of wine and the vinegar of strong drink, we understand teachings of the vine of the earth somewhat related to ethical and doctrinal errors, because the vinegar of wine and strong drink are related to wine and strong drink as their product. Thus we understand the vinegar of wine to represent Babylon's false corrections of misconduct and her supposed corrections of right conduct; while the vinegar of strong drink we understand to represent her attempted refutations of Truth attacks on her errors and her attempted refutations of truths. As examples of the former we may instance the false basis of the Papacy's objections to the divorce of Henry VIII, and her denouncing as revolutionism the reformatory works of Protestant leaders; and as examples of the latter, the Protestant attempted refutations of arguments against eternal torment and in favor of future probation may be given. 

(36) In other words, these four prohibited things in the antitype are the counterfeits of the four uses that the servants of the Truth are to make of the Scriptures, 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


i.e., they are to use the Bible for inculcating doctrine, for refutation of error, for correction of misconduct and for instruction in righteousness (2 Tim. 3:16, 17). But as the four prohibited antitypical things are the counterfeits of the four things for which the servants of the Truth are to use the Scriptures, it is self-evident that the antitypes of the wine, strong drink, vinegar of wine and vinegar of strong drink, are prohibited the antitypical Nazarites—the servants of the Truth in the Church. If they should accept (drink) Babylon's ethical, doctrinal, correctional and refutative errors, they would not only injure themselves, but also the Church. Hence, while such errors should be shunned by the entire priesthood, it is especially necessary that its teachers should shun them, because their acceptance and consequent teaching of them would be doubly injurious—injurious to themselves and injurious to the Church. That the Lord has given the antitypical prohibitions to the antitypical Nazarites is evident, among other things, from St. Paul's exhortations to Timothy and to Titus, and from our Lord's seven letters to the angels of the seven churches along these lines. Thus we see that the four suggested antitypes are not fanciful interpretations, nor wild speculations, but sober facts. 

(37) The last three features forbidden in the first thing prohibited the typical Nazarites are: grape juice (liquor of grapes) and moist (fresh) and dried grapes (raisins). Since wine and strong drink, with their vinegars and grape juice, are all produced from grapes, either fresh or dried, the grapes must represent the source from which the antitypes of these five things flow, i.e., the principles from which the errors of the vine of the earth flow. Consequently we understand these grapes to represent the false principles upon which Babylon's errors are built. E.g., How many doctrinal, ethical, refutative and correctional errors have flown from Babylon's principle—an antitypical 



grape—that the Church was commissioned to convert the world, and then rule over it 1,000 years before the Lord's Return—Post-Millennialism! How many errors have resulted from the higher-critical principle—an antitypical grape—that the principle of religious evolution operating in Israel forbids the acceptance of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch—the first five books of the Bible—since that principle requires centuries of development of a nation of slaves before they would be capable of evolving so complex a system of religion as is now contained in the Pentateuch! 

(38) The dried grapes would type old Babylonian principles, like the Catholic teaching that Tradition is equally with Scripture a source and rule of faith and practice. The fresh grapes would type new Babylonian principles, like one that Mr. Panin contends for—that we are obligated to accept the Masoretic reading of the Hebrew text unless corrected by itself. This contention is made by him in order to force us to drink antitypical grape juice, i.e., the acceptance of the 480 years—the present reading of 1 Kings 6:1—as against the 580 years which the Bible data elsewhere shows to be correct. Grape juice, which is the unfermented product of the grape, therefore, types the immediate deduction of a false principle. It, therefore, types the less developed and minor errors of the vine of the earth as distinct from antitypical wine, strong drink and their vinegars—the fully developed—fermented—errors of Babylon. It is, of course, self-evident that the teachers of the Truth in the Church should not accept the old or new principles of the vine of the earth, or their immediate deductions, as, e.g., The P. B. I. have done on Chronology, on Revelation and on Daniel. Thus our examination of vs. 3 and 4 prove that the teachers of the Church are to abstain from all forms of error and their underlying principles, as well as from the immediate deductions of the latter; and, therefore, by antithesis these verses imply that the 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


teachers of the Truth should hold to the Truth in all its forms, as well as to their underlying principles and the latters' immediate deductions. Undeniably these things are required of the teachers of the Church. 

(39) The second thing prohibited the typical Nazarites was cutting their hair (v. 5). The expression, "All the days of his vow of separation," implies that Nazarite vows were fixed to periods of time, some of which were not, and some of which were, lifelong. As illustrations of the latter kind, we might cite the Nazarite vows—made for them in each case at first by their parents—of Samson, Samuel and John the Baptist, who were thus lifelong Nazarites—Nazarites from their birth. Usually Nazarite vows were assumed by adults, and that for a definite period in each case; but beyond that period the vow did not extend, unless it was broken, when it was renewed for the full period (v. 12). Lifelong Nazarite vows seem to type vows of classes of persons, extending over the whole period of their activity, e.g., from the experiences of the Epiphany Samson we conclude that the Gospel-Age Samson types in the primary instance those "secondarily prophets" who functioned as the stars of the Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicean churches in their capacity of battling against sectarians as the oppressors of the Lord's people. Thus the antitypical Samson in Claudius of Turin killed the antitypical lion—the papacy—by refuting its mouthpieces on papal absolutism and idolism; in Berengar of Tours killed the antitypical thirty Philistines in the controversy on transubstantiation; burned down their fields and smote them with a great slaughter in Peter Abelard's attacks on papal principles and in Peter Waldo's exposure of the wrongs of the papacy; carried away the gates of antitypical Gaza by Marsiglio, Tauler, Wyclif and Huss forcing the pope and cardinals to submit to the reform agitations of the 14th and 15th centuries, culminating in the three reforming 



councils of Pisa, Constance and Basel; in Luther, Hubmaier, Zwingli, Servetus, Cranmer, Browne, Fox, Wesley, Campbell and Miller, the instigators of the ten reform movements, broke the antitypical seven green withes—new doctrinal errors—with which sectarians sought to bind him, broke the new ropes—new erroneous arrangements—with which sectarians sought to bind him, and carried away by his official powers the antitypical Philistines' pin of the beam and web—their efforts to refute his reformatory teachings. But in these ten reformers he was made captive and deceived, when overcome by flatterers; and then he labored under restraints to give religious instruction to the sectarians; but in the angel of the Laodicean Church, since 1874 he has been pulling down Churchianity by its two pillars—apostate Catholicism and apostate Protestantism; and shortly after antitypical Gideon's Second Battle and antitypical John's rebuke and beheading are complete, the antitypical Philistine temple will be in utter ruins and the Laodicean messenger will as a public opponent of sectarian error cease his work. 

(40) We have introduced this brief exposition of the primary antitypical Samson, because it well help us to a better understanding of the antitype of the second prohibition of Num. 6—not letting a razor come upon his head. In Samson's case we learn that his strength was in his hair (Judges 16:17). The Nazarite's hair, therefore, typed the powers of the servants of the Church; and as the antitypical Nazarite's powers grew out of his office, so the Nazarite's head types the office of the antitypical Nazarites, out of which their powers grew, e.g., the special powers of the apostolic office were, plenipotentiariship, inspiration, infallibility, binding and loosing, and bestowing the gifts of the Spirit, as the special powers of the office of the special "secondarily prophets" have been to act as the Lord's special eye, mouth and hand, with respect to the seasonal 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


teachings and works of their days. These powers grew out of their offices—symbolic heads. For the typical Nazarite to permit his locks to grow long types the fact that the antitypical Nazarites should continue to exercise and develop their official powers; and for the typical Nazarite to permit others to cut off his hair would type an antitypical Nazarite permitting others to make him cease exercising his official powers, as to cut them off himself would type an antitypical Nazarite giving up the exercise of his office powers. St. Paul, refusing to permit his apostolic powers to be taken from him, as the second epistle to the Corinthians and the epistle to the Galatians show him to have done, is an antitype of a Nazarite not allowing a razor to come upon his head; while the above-mentioned ten reformers in permitting their office powers to be taken from them by sectarians of their own movements, antitype a Nazarite allowing his hair to be cut off. The antitypical shearing would imply either a measure of unfaithfulness, or at least of carelessness (as typed in Samson), in the exercise of antitypical Nazarite powers, unless a direct command from the Lord would charge the antitypical Nazarite to permit it. John Wesel, in repudiating under the threats of the inquisition his teachings, and thus his office powers, seems to antitype a Nazarite who cut off his own locks. The Lord, by Sts. Paul and Peter, exhorting the servants of the Church to be faithful in using their office powers (1 Cor. 4:1, 2; 1 Pet. 5:1-4), and by St. Paul, saying to Timothy, "Do the work of an evangelist," "make full proof of thy ministry," in part antitypes Jehovah's charging the typical Nazarite to let his locks grow long. If we consider the explanations just made as to the antitypical Nazarite's head, hair, the latter's growing long, and its cutting off, we will readily recognize their Scripturalness, reasonablesness and factualness. 

(41) The third prohibition of Num. 6 (vs. 6-9) 



forbade the Nazarites to defile their heads by contact with, or to come into the presence of, the dead. Death coming to the whole race as a result of Adam's sin (Rom. 5:12), the dead type sin and sinners (Num. 19:11-22). As to touch the dead made one typically unclean, so to "touch" sin and sinners, to fellowship in spirit with them, i.e., to sin, makes one antitypically unclean, contaminates, defiles him. Vs. 7 and 8 show that to come in contact with the dead would make one unholy; and this proves sin and sinners are typed by the dead and that contact with them or being in their presence types the act of sinning. Sin is the universal defiler. It makes us unclean before God. Its defilement is fittingly typed by that of the dead; for death is its effect, (Rom. 6:23; 5:12; Gen. 2:17). Therefore the prohibition of the Nazarite's coming in contact with, or in the presence of, the dead, types Jehovah's forbidding the servants of the Church to defile themselves by sin, contact with the dead typing a more serious sin than being in the dead's presence does. All will admit that God does this especially to the servants of the Church, though He also does this to all the members of the Church. The three antitypical Nazaritic prohibitions—not to accept false teachings, principles, and the latters' immediate deductions, not to give up or permit others to take away their official powers, and not to defile themselves with sin, all must admit embrace all God's prohibitions to His antitypical Nazarites; and these three prohibitions covering all the cases demonstrate that our understanding of the antitypical Nazarites is correct. Here is no fanciful interpretation; here is no wild speculation; rather here are only Scriptural, reasonable and factual interpretations presented for our acceptance. 

(42) V. 6 shows that the prohibition of the typical defiling covered the whole period of the typical Nazariteship. This proves that the prohibition of the antitypical defiling covers the entire period of the antitypical 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


Nazariteship. God desires clean servants. "Be ye clean that bear the vessels of the Lord" (Is. 52:11). Sin-defiled servants of the Lord are a hindrance to the free transmission of the Spirit and Word of the Lord, while clean servants of the Lord further His cause and bless those to whom they minister (2 Tim. 2:21). Therefore God gave the typical and antitypical prohibitions as to defilement by the dead. Therefore, let the servants of the Church see to their freedom from sin's contamination. 

(43) In v. 7 the Lord gives, as to typical defilement, particulars which the natural man would consider extreme; but they are inserted into the type to show that no matter how near the relationship with the dead might be, no defilement should be allowed to come therefrom—not even from contact with, or being in the presence of, a dead father, mother, brother, or sister. This seemingly extreme charge was because of the antitype. For spiritual contamination can very readily come from a dead spiritual father, mother, brother, or sister. Evidently, the dead spiritual father cannot be God, as the Father of the Truth servants; for in Him is no sin nor darkness at all. But the Scriptures speak of those whom God uses as ministering the begettal to us as our spiritual fathers. Thus St. Paul speaks of himself as the father of the Corinthian brethren, of Timothy, Titus and Onesimus, because he ministered the begettal to them (1 Cor. 4:15; 1 Tim. 1:2; Tit. 1:4; Phile. 10). The dead father would thus represent such an one turning from the Lord to sin. We would, therefore, understand the prohibition of the Nazarite's defiling himself by his death father to type the prohibition of a Truth servant's permitting the one who ministered the begettal to him, but now spiritually dead, so to influence him as to drag him into sin after him. By the antitypical Nazarite's mother, we would not understand the Oath-bound Promises to be here meant; for there is no sin nor darkness in it. But as 



the Scriptures speak of those who develop the embryo new creatures as their spiritual mothers (Gal. 4:19, 27; Is. 54:1, 5, 13, 17), so we would understand the dead mothers of the antitypical Nazarites to type such brethren as formerly nourished their spiritual lives and later fell away. The antitypical Nazarites should not touch or be in the presence of these-they should not allow them in their spiritual deadness to contaminate them with, or draw them into, sin. The dead brother types a sinning Little Flock member who was not a special helper to an antitypical Nazarite; and the dead sister types a Great Company member who has gone into sin (2 Cor. 6:16-18). The antitypical Nazarite should not let such influence him into sin. Our Pastor has given expression to the substance of these thoughts in the Manna comment for Sept. 17, which please see. 

(44) The reason why the typical Nazarite should not defile himself by the dead is "because the consecration of his God is upon his head," i.e., because he is especially consecrated to God in an office which forbids such defilement. It is especially from this verse and v. 9 that we derive the thought that the Nazarite's head types the office of the Truth servant. The office of an antitypical Nazarite is a specially consecrated thing. Therefore God requires a special consecration of its incumbent for its possession and exercise. Hence the consecration of his God is upon his office; and thus this office is by God separated from sin unto good works. Therefore it should not be contaminated by sin, as the sin of an antitypical Nazarite would certainly contaminate his office—his antitypical head (v. 9). Hence it is very necessary that he be holy (set apart) unto the Lord for His purposes, all of which are holy and sinless, all the time he exercises his office; even as in the type the Nazarite had to be holy unto the Lord all the days of his separation. 

(45) V. 9 shows that even a sudden, unexpected 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


death in the presence of a Nazarite would defile him: "If any man die very suddenly by [beside] him, etc." Such a sudden death would type a Truth servant's being overtaken unthoughtedly, unexpectedly by a sin. Peter's denial of our Lord was such a sin. It was committed unthoughtedly and without deliberation. He was surprised suddenly, and by fear did what afterward broke his heart as he deliberated thereon. In the type such an unexpected death defiled the Nazarite's head, and required him to shave his head on the day of his cleansing—the seventh day—in token that his Nazariteship was defiled and needed cleansing before it could be renewed. This types the fact that a Truth servant should recognize that even in being overtaken by a sin, he defiles his office and forfeits the right of holding the office, unless he cleanses himself and as a Truth servant gains forgiveness. His recognizing that he has forfeited his office by his sin is typed by the Nazarite's cutting his hair off; and the genuineness of his desire for reinstatement is proven by his cleansing himself of the sin. The completion of the cleansing on the evening of the seventh day (Num. 19:19) types the fact that the antitypical Nazarite is by full reformation reckoned as living in the end of the Millennium as a restored—a sinless—human being. 

(46) But to picture forth the thought that he as a consecrated person is likewise reckoned as living in the eighth thousand-years day, during which reckoned time our Lord continues to impute His merit for the members of His Body who have sinned after their consecration and Spirit-begettal (1 John 2:1, 2), the atonement for the Nazarite's uncleanness was made on the eighth day (v. 10). And to picture forth the thought that the cleansed antitypical Nazarite is renewed in his office in the reckoned eighth thousand-years day, the renewal of the typical Nazarite's vow was made on the eighth day after his cleansing began. In the offerings, subsequent to the atonement day, the typical offerings, 



cattle, sheep or fowl or fine flour, were severally offered according to the varying ability of the offerers—the rich bringing cattle, typical of the perfect sacrifices at the end of the Millennium, the middle class bringing sheep, typical of the consecrated services of the world about half way up restitution, and the poor bringing fowl or fine flour, typical of the services of those beginning restitution consecration. The fact that the typical Nazarite brought two turtle doves or two young pigeons (v. 10), types the deep self-humiliation of the defiled antitypical Nazarite; for he must consider himself as the worst of offenders, because of his greater light and grace. The priest to whom he brings them can type no one else than our Lord as our High Priest; for He alone makes atonement for others during the Gospel Age—the reckoned antitypical eighth day. The Nazarite's bringing the two fowl to the door of the tabernacle types the antitypical Nazarite's exercising repentance and cherishing the desire for forgiveness—justification from his sin. His bringing them to the priest types the antitypical Nazarite's faith in our Lord as his sin and death atoning High Priest. 

(47) The priest's offering one fowl as a sin offering (v. 11) types our Lord's making available His sacrifice, which provides a merit sufficient to work forgiveness for the repentant and believing Truth servant; and his offering the other fowl as a burnt offering types the fact that the Lord's sacrifice, so made available, is manifested as acceptable to the Father on behalf of the repentant and believing Truth servant. The priest's making atonement for the Nazarite types our Lord's imputing His merit and thus actually atoning for the repentant and believing Truth servant. To show that the atonement covers only Adamic sins in the antitype, the statement is made that the atonement was made for the one who had sinned by the dead—as an Adamic sinner. And the priest's hallowing the head of the 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


Nazarite on that day—the eighth day—types the fact that the office of the antitypical Nazarite is again set apart for him—that he is reinstated into his office without prejudice to him. This entire transaction well types our Lord's mercy and faithfulness toward the offending, but repentant and believing Truth servant (Heb. 2:17), an example of which we see in His dealing with the Apostle Peter. 

(48) The Nazarite's renewing his vow (v. 12) types the Truth servant anew dedicating himself to the Lord in his office. He must renew his devotion, and also recover the ground lost through the sin, and that with all faithfulness and zeal in living the Truth and in executing the responsibilities of his office, which is typed by the former days of the defiled Nazarite's vow not counting, and by his making the renewed vow for the full time formerly fixed by him. The Nazarite's bringing a ram of one year as a trespass offering types the fact that the offending, but repentant and believing Truth servant must not only undo the wrong which he committed, but also must root out of his character the evil quality or qualities from which the wrong flowed. This is more or less of a laborious process, requiring watching, praying, battling and persevering spiritual exercise; because these evil qualities are more or less entrenched in the disposition; and the devil, the world and the flesh struggle against his efforts to dislodge them. His bringing a ram as the trespass offering also types the Truth servant's faith in Christ's character which he pledges to imitate. 

(49) The rest of the chapter beginning with v. 13 gives the law's requirement on the Nazarite when his vow was fulfilled. Actually, in the antitype the things represented by what was done on the day of the fulfilment of the typical vow are done from the outstart of the antitypical Nazarite's service. But the Lord in the type had them figured forth at the end in order to show the progressive work unto a completion in the 



antitype. At least one of the things done in the type—the burning of the Nazarite's long hair under the peace offering—could not have been done at the beginning of his vow; for his hair was not then long, nor was it at that time hair which was grown during the Nazariteship. Sometimes the Lord presents a typical matter at the outstart of a typical service to show the finished work in the antitype, e.g., Aaron robed in beauty and glory before his consecration and anointing was to show that God views "the things that be not, as though they were," in view of what they would be; and sometimes, as in the case before us, the Lord arranged a certain feature of a typical transaction at the end of a type, to show the progress of the antitype unto a completion. We will readily see this to be the case as we study the rest of this chapter, which describes the services of and for the Nazarite on the day his vow was completed. The last clause of v. 13 should be rendered, "he shall cause himself to go to the door of the tabernacle." He was not brought there, but went there of his own free will; and so in the antitype—the antitypical Nazarite is not forced to perform the service of his office, but willingly does it (1 Pet. 5:2, 3); for he comes before the Lord and serves Him before His people willingly and openly. 

(50) There are certain similarities and dissimilarities between the Nazarite's offerings in vs. 14-20 and those made for the priests at their consecration as given in Lev. 8; and the dissimilarities, as was seen above, enabled us to recognize the antitypical Nazarites. The fact that the types of the Church's sacrifice show many sacrifices, does not imply that there are many sacrifices of the Church; but they show various aspects of the one sacrifice of the Church, in which, of course, the Truth servants, the antitypical Nazarites, share. Thus the sin-offering types the atoning feature of the Church's one sacrifice; the burnt offering types its manifested acceptableness; the peace offering 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


or ram of consecration types the covenant obligations, vows, that it assumes in its sacrifice; the meat and drink offering types that the sacrifice is offered by spreading the simple and deep truths as due; the wave offering types the continuity and elevating character of its sacrifice; the heave offering types the glorification of God and Christ through its sacrifice being offered from holy qualities; and the free will offerings represent the spontaneity of its sacrifice. Most of these aspects of the part of the Church's sacrifice offered by the Truth servants are brought out typically in vs. 14-20. Thus the Nazarite brought as the burnt offering the he lamb of the first year without blemish to type the faith of the antitypical Nazarite in Christ's unblemished and mature merit as making his sacrifice acceptable before God. Thus the Nazarite brought the ewe lamb of the first year without blemish to type the sacrifice of the antitypical Nazarite as a part of the sin-atoning sacrifice of the Church. Its being one year old types the maturity of the antitypical Nazarite's sacrifice, and its being without blemish types that the antitypical Nazarite's sacrifice, covered by Christ's merit, is unblemished in God's sight (Heb. 13:16; 1 Pet. 2:5). The typical Nazarite's bringing the unblemished ram as a peace offering, types the Truth servants' assuming vows, covenant obligations, which they fulfill by faithfully ministering in their office. 

(51) As we have seen, there was no cake of pure unleavened bread in the basket of unleavened bread that the Nazarite brought, as there was in the basket at the consecration of the priests (Lev. 8:26); but the unleavened bread that he brought consisted of cakes of fine flour mingled with oil and wafers anointed with oil, just as were in the basket at the priests' consecration. This types the fact that the Nazarites as such appear on the scene of service some time after they as priests were consecrated, i.e., sometime after their justified humanity (the cake of pure unleavened bread) 



was offered in sacrifice. The Nazarite's cake mingled with oil types the same thing as the similar cake did at the priests' consecration—Spirit-begetting, sanctification. So, also, the Nazarite's wafer represents the same thing as the priests' wafer—the hope of glory, glorification. The meat offerings and drink offerings represent worship—service—and praise. We worship—serve—God by furthering His plan; and we praise Him when we declare His works which reveal His glorious attributes: wisdom, justice, love and power. In other words, serving and spreading the Truth are the antitypical meat and drink offering, the meat offerings—the solids—representing the deeper truths, and the drink offerings—the liquids—representing the simpler, the surface, truths. Thus the Nazarite's bringing the meat and drink offerings type the Truth servants' serving and declaring the deep and the surface truths of the Lord; and thereby they worship and praise God. 

(52) The priest (v. 16) who presented the Nazarite's sacrifices represents our Lord as the High Priest of all the Under-priests, and therefore of the Truth servants—the antitypical Nazarites. The priest presenting the Nazarite's offerings types our High Priest offering the Truth servants' sacrifices, their co-operation with Him therein being represented by the Nazarite's bringing them, by his waving the sodden shoulder with the cake and wafer thereon together with the priest, and by his cutting off his hair and putting it on the fire under the peace offering. In what sense does Jesus offer the sacrifice of the Truth servants? By initiating every one of their sacrificial acts, i.e., He plans their sacrificial acts; He manipulates them into the surroundings and circumstances calling for them; He enlightens their minds as to what and how to sacrifice; He arouses their New Creatures to do the sacrificial things; and He sustains them in such activities unto a completion. What is meant by their co-operating 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


with Him in the sacrifice? Their yielding their heads, hearts and all else they have to Him in the performance of the sacrificial acts? Those, among whom are the Amramites, are entirely mistaken who think that Jesus does all our sacrificing without our cooperation. Many Scriptures, e.g., Heb. 13:16, 17; 1 Pet. 2:5, as well as the type that we are now examining, prove the reverse. Moreover, our experience proves the reverse; for we certainly join with Him in using up our all in spreading the Truth. We know by experience that we have as volunteers, sharp-shooters, colporteurs, conversers, teachers and preachers, declared the Truth, using, under our Lord, of our consecrated human all to perform these services. We praise the Lord that Jesus offers our sacrifices, and that we are privileged to co-operate with Him therein. 

(53) The priest offering the Nazarite's sin-offering (v. 16) types that our Lord offers the sacrifice of the Truth servants as a part of the Church's Sin-offering; and His offering the Nazarite's burnt-offering types God through our Lord Jesus manifesting through the merit of Jesus' sacrifice the sacrifices of the Truth servants as acceptable to God. The priest offering the Nazarite's peace offering (v. 17) types our Lord enabling the Truth servants to fulfill the covenant obligations of their office—the promises, vows, that they made the Lord as to their office. The priest's doing this with the basket of unleavened cakes types the fact that our Lord enables the Truth servants to fulfill these vows as New Creatures in sanctification and in the hope of glory. The priest's offering the meat and drink offering with the peace offering types the fact that our Lord as the High Priest enables the Truth servants to know and declare the seasonal Truth in its deep and surface features. 

(54) The Nazarite's shaving his hair (v. 18) was preparatory to his putting it into the fire under the peace offering, in order to facilitate the latter's burning. 



The Nazarite's hair, as shown above, types the official powers of the Truth servants. These powers, of course, are used from the time of their reception even unto the end of their ministry to facilitate the fulfillment of the Truth servants' official obligations—burning the peace offering, which thought is typed by burning the hair in the fire under the peace offering. In the type the hair could not have been cut off at the beginning of the Nazarite's vow, for the two reasons above given, as well as for the reason that it would have been in violation of his vow. But Jehovah wisely arranged the type so as not to make it impinge against its own requirements and yet bring out the antitypical burning of the hair throughout the entire period of the antitypical Nazarite's service, by having the hair cut off and burned under the peace offering at the expiration of the vow period, the principle of a progressional work unto a completion being here used by Him, so as to make the type and antitype harmonious with one another without prejudice to the type. The Nazarite's shaving his head at the gate of the tabernacle types the fact that the Truth servants publicly, before the Lord's people, make their official powers available for the fulfillment of the obligations that they assumed when they accepted the office that the Lord gave them. 

(55) Vs. 19 and 20 describe the wave offering: v. 19 showing the Nazarite's part, and v. 20 showing the priest's part therein. The shoulder of the ram is, of course, a part of one of its forelegs; and if a shoulder is mentioned as that of a human being, it would by relation suggest his arm and hand. In the symbols of the Bible, the arm represents power and the hand represents service. The powerful service of Truth servants is, therefore, typed by the sodden shoulder of the ram of the peace offering; and such a service he is to present continually (wave) before the Lord as long as his ministry lasts. The unleavened cake and wafer were placed on this shoulder to symbolize that this powerful 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


service continually presented before the Lord was that of a New Creature in sanctification and in hope of glory—of glorification. The wave offering being performed in the type after the Nazarite cut off his hair, is in perfect keeping with the antitype; for the Truth servants first begin to use their official powers (cut off the hairs and burn them under the peace offering) before they can offer a continued service (the wave offering). 

(56) Not only did the Nazarite wave the wave offering; but the priest also did it (v. 20). This double participation was accomplished by the priest's putting his hands under those of the Nazarite, supporting, empowering and controlling him in the waving. And this is exactly what we know to be true in the antitype; therefore we infer that it was done in the type. By a somewhat different figure this is shown by our Lord's holding the seven stars in His right hand (Rev. 1:16, 20; 2:1). Thus our Lord, as the High Priest, has assisted, supported, empowered and controlled the Apostles and certain "secondarily prophets" as His special mouth, hand and eye, in their pertinent stages of the Church. The breast (which contains the organs of breathing) used in waving represents the intellectual faculties of the Truth servants in which is the Word of God—the breath of the Lord. The thigh (mistranslated shoulder) used in heaving, represents their heart faculties in which are the Spirit's qualities, the feet, legs, thighs, in the Bible symbolizing conduct, characteristics. The waving by the priest and the Nazarite represents continued use of the intellectual faculties of the Truth servants for the Lord's service; and the heaving of the thigh would, therefore, represent the raising of the Truth servants' graces to God in services that honor Him. When it is said that the sodden shoulder and the cake and wafer were the priest's, there is typed the fact that the Lord Jesus gets pleasure and service from the powerful works of 



Truth performed by the antitypical Nazarites in their sanctification of the Spirit and in their hope of glorification. By the priest's getting as his the wave breast there is typed our Lord getting for the furtherance of His ministry the intellectual faculties of the antitypical Nazarites, for a continued work on behalf of God's plan; and when it is said that the priest received as his the heave thigh, there is typed the fact that our Lord has received honor and exaltation (heave) by the heart qualities and conduct—the graces of the Spirit expressed in the good deeds—of the antitypical Nazarites. 

(57) The statement (v. 20) that after this the Nazarite might drink wine, does not type the thought that the antitypical Nazarites, after the completion of their service, may accept false teachings; but it calls attention to the fact that the person who had completed the above service was no longer a Nazarite, but was an ordinary Israelite, and, therefore, cannot type an antitypical Nazarite after fulfilling his office, like Sts. Paul and Peter, etc., after they left the earth. Another significant item is suggested in v. 21 by the expression, "beside that which his hand shall get." This implies that what is stated of him above was the minimum that he should offer; but that if able he should offer more. We understand this to represent that there would be degrees of development in antitypical Nazarites. And, of course, experience shows that this is true. As a class the Apostles were, except that Servant, the greatest of the antitypical Nazarites; and the antitypical male Nazarites have been greater than the antitypical female Nazarites. Moreover, in each class of antitypical Nazarites, certain ones' "hands"—service—brought them more than those of others. St. Paul was easily the greatest of the apostolic antitypical Nazarites, as our Pastor was the greatest of the special mouthpieces who were "secondarily prophets." The thought, therefore, is that some would be able to offer more because their hand—service—would get more, 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


would accomplish more. This thought also types the fact that the Lord advances His servants in proportion as their "hand shall get," or to put it in another form: in proportion to their use of their "pound" in His service. 

(58) Vs. 22-27 give us a clue to the thought of our chapter, and glorious indeed are the thoughts that the Lord has typed in these verses. Jehovah commanded through Moses that Aaron and his sons should use the words of vs. 24-26 as their benediction on Israel, ever as Jesus as God's Executive has charged Himself as High Priest and His Body, especially the Truth servants, as under-priests, to confer blessing upon antitypical Israel. This blessing was, like those of Lev. 9:22, 23, doubtless extended with hands uplifted toward Israel. At any rate, the antitypical blessing is conferred by the antitypical hands extended toward antitypical Israel, i.e., the services—the hands—that Christ and the Church have performed have conveyed a blessing of a threefold character, as in the type. Each of the three parts of the blessing was twofold, and was so for good reasons. How have the antitypical Nazarites been blessing the people? (1) As Jehovah's agents they (a) led the amenable by repentance from the antitypical camp toward the gate of the antitypical court and (b) preserved them in that repentant attitude. (2) As Jehovah's agents they (a) led them to faith in Christ (through the gate), into justification—the antitypical court, and (b) through the antitypical court, giving them knowledge of the teachings centering in the Sin-offerings—the antitypical brazen altar—and helping them to cleanse themselves by the water of the Word—the antitypical laver. (3) As Jehovah's agents they (a) led them by consecration and Spirit-begetting into the antitypical Holy, and (b) there enlightened them with knowledge at the antitypical lampstand, strengthened them with grace at the antitypical table, and made them fruitful in service at the antitypical golden



altar unto their ending their sacrifice under the second vail. It is with these three forms of double blessing that especially the Truth servants have as Jehovah's agents blessed the blessable Israelites. 

(59) With this statement of actual facts—antitypes—let us quote and in brackets briefly expound the Aaronic benediction, which we will find to type the bestowal of these facts or blessings. Incidentally, this explanation proves that this benediction has no reference to the trinity, as alleged by the Nominal Church. "The Lord bless thee [Jehovah by our services grant thee repentance], and keep thee [maintain thee in a reformed attitude against temptations to turn back into sin]. The Lord make His face shine upon thee [Jehovah by our services give thee tentative justification, smiling upon thee with a reconciled face], and be gracious unto thee [by giving thee a knowledge of all truths connected with justification, and by helping thee to love and practice righteousness and hate and forsake wickedness]. The Lord lift up His countenance upon thee [the Lord give thee grace for grace, i.e., the high calling for thy justified human all which He first gave thee] and give thee peace [prosperity of the Spirit in grace, knowledge and fruitfulness in service]." Certainly, especially by the Truth servants, the Lord has wrought these blessings on antitypical Israel. And by conferring these blessings through their ministry of the Word these Truth servants have put God's name (character) on antitypical Israel, and thereby Jehovah has blessed antitypical Israel (v. 27). Praise our God, dear antitypical Israel, for antityping unto you the Aaronic benediction! Love and prize the still faithful antitypical Nazarites through whom He ministered this antitypical benediction; and, dear fellow antitypical Nazarites, let us faithfully serve antitypical Israel with our extended hands—our ministries—blessing them as Jehovah's agents, thus putting His character on them as the expression of His greatest blessing! 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 



(1) What chapters of Numbers have we previously studied? From what standpoints and applications? What chapter, and from what standpoints and applications, does this study cover? How may the rest of Numbers be viewed? What are typed by certain corner boards and pillars in the Most Holy? What are the antitypical relations? Wherein will the study of Numbers and Deuteronomy help? 

(2) Who are typed in Num. 5:1-4? Prove this of each class. What is typed by expelling the unclean from the camp? Why should this be done? What does Israel's obeying the injunction type? 

(3) What is typed in vs. 5-10? What four things were done in the type for wrong-doing? What does each one of these four things type? In what cases should confession to man not be made? 

(4) What is typed by making restitution to God and the priest? What does our reformation do to God and Christ? What is typed by bringing the ram to the priest and his offering it for atonement? 

(5) How many distinct things are mentioned in v. 9 as being the priest's? What do the seven kinds of sacrifices type? What was the heave offering, type and antitype? What else were called heave offerings? What do all these kinds type? 

(6) What are typed in vs. 11-31? In what respects? How were they typed? What is an ordeal? Describe the ordeals of the heathen and of the Dark Ages in Christendom. Describe in contrast the only Biblical ordeal. What does its antitype enable us to recognize? 

(7) How will we study vs. 11-31? What is typed by the husband, wife, priest and ordeal of Num. 5:11-31? State and refute three objections to this setting. 

(8) What is set forth in verses 12-14, type and antitype? What were these circumstances? What are typed by the guilty and the innocent woman? Where and how are the antitypes described? What is not and what is typed by the husband's ignorance of, and efforts to ascertain the true character of the wife? 

(9) What is typed by the husband's bringing the wife to the priest? Why to the priest, type and antitype? What is typed by the offering, its being furnished by the husband, 



its being a tenth ephah of flour? What was the antitypical meat offering of the Greek, Roman, Lutheran, Reformed and Baptist Churches, and of the true Church? 

(10) Among other things, what do oil and frankincense type? Prove it. Why, type and antitype, were no oil and frankincense put on this meat offering? Explain the reasonableness and appropriateness of the antitype. What illustrates it? In what two ways did the meat offering serve? 

(11) What is meant and typed by bringing the woman near before the Lord? Give three special examples from Church History wherein the antitype is seen. Give three general cases antitypical of this. 

(12) Whence was the holy water obtained? Prove it. What does it type? Prove it. What does the earthen vessel type? Name some of these. What does the dust of the tabernacle's floor type? What does the mixing of the water and dust in the vessel type? 

(13) Why is the fact of the woman's setting before the Lord stated again? What is symbolized by an uncovered and covered head? Prove it. What is typed by uncovering the woman's head? What would follow from this in the case of the antitypical guilty and innocent woman? Why? What corroborates this understanding? 

(14) In what two capacities did this meat offering stand? What is typed by the priest's putting it in these capacities into the woman's hands before the ordeal proper? Give four illustrations of this. Why, positively and negatively, must this have been? 

(15) What is typed by the priest holding in his hand the earthen vessel? Give and explain a passage which includes this, among other thoughts. What uses of the seven stars has the Lord made beside this? 

(16) What was done to the woman, as is shown in vs. 19-22? What is the difference between v. 19 and vs. 20-22? What did she by being sworn agree to? What do the oath details type? Give some illustrations of these antitypical things implied in the oath, as acted out by the churches and the Church. 

(17) How would drinking the water affect the innocent and the guilty woman? How was the difference effected? Wherein did the primary and the secondary working of the curse differ? Of what two parts did the primary curse consist?

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


What is typed by no harm and pain being experienced by the innocent woman? Show this from experiences in the Parousia and Epiphany. What will be found when the sixth sifting is over? 

(18) What is meant by "the kings of the earth"? What is symbolic fornication? What are the guilty called in Revelation? What is typed by the swelling belly? Explain Scripturally the aptness of this picture. How does the belly symbolize teachings? How is the symbolic swelling effected? 

(19) How has this occurred in the cases of the Catholic, Lutheran and Episcopal churches as illustrations of such belly-swelling? 

(20) What was the second feature of the typical primary curse? What did it make impossible? What do walking, upright walking and limping walking symbolize? Show this from the Bible. What does the shrunken thigh type? Who have had it? Show this and the antitypical belly-swelling from the history of Huss and the Catholic Church, in the latter's dealings with Huss, Jerome of Prague and Huss' followers through the Emperor. 

(21) Show this from the history of Servetus and the Reformed Church. How many special times did Servetus work literarily against trinitarianism? What Reformed leaders opposed him? What one at his second witness especially opposed him? What two efforts did Calvin make to destroy Servetus? How did he succeed in the second? What did his activity therein—approved by his fellow leaders—manifest? 

(22) Into what book did the priest write? What did he write therein, and what did he do with the ink? What did such writing in the book indicate to the woman? What does the book, the writing and wiping the ink into the water type? In what book do we especially find these curses set forth? What on this line have we observed in the Parousia and the Epiphany? 

(23) What is typed by the priest's causing the woman to drink, and by the water becoming bitter? 

(24) Before causing the woman to drink, what did the priest first do with the meat offering? What does this type? What did not prevent our Lord from doing this? Prove this Scripturally. How is our Lord's doing this a 



long time and in a right manner typed? What did the priest then do with the meat offering? What does this type? When were the two antitypical transactions performed relatively to the ordeal? 

(25) What does the handful of meal type? What does the priest's taking it and offering it upon the altar type? What did the perfume of it type? Who co-operated with Him in this service? 

(26) What is typed by the guilty woman's drinking the water? Repeat the antitypes of the swollen belly and the shrunken thigh. What was the secondary curse, type and antitype, in its two parts? Who are the antitypes of the kinsfolk? Give illustrations of the antitype as respects the kinsfolk of the Catholic, the Episcopal and the Presbyterian churches. 

(27) From what evils did the Lord shield the innocent woman, type and antitype? What blessing did He give her, type and antitype? Give Parousia and Epiphany examples showing the antitype. What do we now see in Great Company sects? 

(28) On whom were activities, involved in the ordeal, made obligatory, type and antitype? How would the complying husband, type and antitype, be regarded? What would the guilty woman, type and antitype, have to do? What say the Scriptures and Church History as to our Lord's compliance with the antitypical law? What kind of a Bridegroom and Priest does this prove Him to be? What say the Scriptures and Church History as to the Church's compliance with this law? What kind of an Espoused does this prove her to be?' What say the Scriptures and history of the compliance with this law on the part of each denominational church and each Great Company sect? What kind of an Espoused does this prove each of these to be? 

(29) What thoughts are corroborated by our study of Num. 1-5; 26? From these chapters and Heb. 3 and 4, what may we infer as to the rest of Numbers? What is the character of the above presentations? In comparison with, and opposition to, them and their connected works, what do Levitical presentations and activities betray? 

(30) What is typed by the pillar representing Revelation and the board representing Numbers, in the Holy of 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


Holies, abutting one another? What does this imply as to their symbolizations? Show this in the tribal relations, in the faithful and unfaithful marital, and the seven angels' and Nazarite relation. 

(31) Whom do the Nazarites type? What proves that they type special consecrated persons? What offering of theirs proves that they type sin-atoners? What feature in this offering proves that they type only part of the Church? What thing lacking in their offering proves that they do not type Millennial-Age persons? What thing absent from, and what things present in, their offering, prove that they represent persons whose special activities begin some time after their priesthood began. Give illustrations of this. 

(32) What does v. 2 specifically show? What do the male Nazarites type? What do the female Nazarites type? What is the basis for this difference between the two kinds of antitypical Nazarites? What does the word Nazarite mean? How does the Amer. Rev. Ver. translate part of v. 2? What does an ordinary vow type? What is typed by a special vow? 

(33) What kind of Nazarites are mentioned nowhere else than in v. 2? To what kind does the rest of the chapter refer? What do these things typically prove? Why does the rest of the chapter refer to the male Nazarites exclusively? What teaching does the rest of the chapter give as to female Nazarites? How is this proved? What antitypical significance does this contain? 

(34) What three things were prohibited the typical Nazarites? What does their prohibition imply in the antitype? What is the summary of the first prohibition? What does the vine of v. 4 not type? Why not? What does it type? Why? Why are its products prohibited the Truth servants? To what should this prohibition influence them? 

(35) Where are the details of this prohibition given? What and how many are they? What do they typically prove? What groupings of these seven prohibited things are made? What are the first four? In how many and in what symbolic senses is wine used Scripturally? What is its good sense? Give Scriptural proofs for this. What is its bad sense? Give Scriptural proofs for this. What do the wine and strong drink of v. 3 type? Prove this from parallel passages. Give illustrations of some Catholic ethical 



errors, also of some Protestant ethical errors. To what do the antitypical vinegar of wine and of strong drink stand related? What does the vinegar of wine type? Why? What does the vinegar of strong drink type? Why? Give some examples of Catholic antitypical vinegar of wine. Give examples of Protestant antitypical vinegar of strong drink. 

(36) Of what are these four prohibited antitypes the counterfeits? Quote the Scripture that shows these. What should be said as to the propriety of prohibiting these four antitypes? Why should the Truth servants not accept the prohibited antitypes? Who in general and who in particular should shun them? Give some illustrations which prove that the Lord prohibits the Truth servants from imbibing these four kinds of erroneous teachings. What is and what is not the character of these interpretations? 

(37) What are the last three prohibited features of the vine's products? What do the grapes type? Why? What antitypical grape has produced a multitude of Babylon's doctrinal, ethical, refutatory and correctional errors? What antitypical grape has produced errors as to the authorship of the Pentateuch? 

(38) What do the dry grapes type? Give an illustration of an antitypical dried grape. What do the fresh grapes type? Give an illustration of an antitypical fresh grape. What does grape juice type? Why? What should Truth teachers not do with the antitypical fresh and dry grapes and grape juice? Summarize the antitypical teachings of vs. 3 and 4. What conclusion by contrast follows from these prohibitions? 

(39) What was the second thing prohibited the Nazarites? What does the expression, "all the days of his vow of separation" imply? As respects time what two kinds of Nazarite vows were there? Give examples of the lifelong kind. Describe the other kind. What do lifelong Nazarites seem to type? How does the primary Gospel-Age Samson show this? Give some of the leading Gospel-Age experiences of the primary Gospel-Age Samson. 

(40) Why has the Samson type been introduced into this article? From it what do we learn to be the antitype of the Nazarite's hair? What did the Nazarite's head type? Why? Show this from the powers of the Apostles 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


and the special "secondarily prophets." What is typed by the Nazarite's letting his hair grow long? What would be typed by its being cut off by himself? By others? How did St. Paul refuse to permit others to cut off his antitypical hair? How did the ten instigators of the ten reform movements permit theirs to be cut off? What would the cutting off of the antitypical hair imply in Truth servants? Under what sole condition would such implications not be present? Who cut off his antitypical hair? Give several antitypes of Jehovah's prohibiting the Nazarite's hair from being cut off. What judgment should we express as to the character of the explanation on the second Nazaritic prohibition? 

(41) What was the third Nazaritic prohibition? What is typed by the dead? Prove the answer. What is typed by the Nazarite's being defiled by the dead? How do vs. 7 and 8 prove this? How was the Nazarite defiled by the dead—type and antitype? How many of the Lord's antitypical Nazaritic prohibitions are covered by the three typical Nazaritic prohibitions? What does this fact prove as to our explanations? 

(42) How long did the third prohibition—type and antitype—apply? Why does God desire clean Truth servants? How should this influence Truth servants? 

(43) What would the natural man think of the particulars in v. 7? Why were they inserted in the type and antitype? What are these particulars? Who are not and who are the antitypical dead father, mother, brother and sister? Prove the answer in each case. What is typed by the Nazarite's being defiled by his dead father, mother, brother and sister? Give a Manna comment that treats of the subject matter of this antitype. 

(44) Why was a Nazarite not to defile himself with the dead? What do vs. 7 and 9 teach to be the antitype of the Nazarite's head? What is the character of a Truth servant's office, and what does it require of him? Why? 

(45) Even what would defile a typical Nazarite? What does such a death type? Cite an illustrative example. What would such a death require of a Nazarite? When? What did these facts type? When was the typical cleansing completed? What does this type? 

(46) What is typed by the Nazarite's renewing his vow, 



and that on the eighth day? And by the priest's making atonement for him, and that on the eighth day? What were the three grades of offerings brought by Israelites? What did these type severally? What is typed by the typical Nazarite's bringing the fowl as offerings? Whom did the priest type? Prove this. What is typed by the Nazarite's bringing the offerings to the gate of the court? To the priest? 

(47) What is typed by the priest's offering one fowl for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering? What is typed by the priest's making atonement for the Nazarite? How was atonement for Adamic sins thereby shown? What is typed by the priest's hallowing the Nazarite's head? And that on the eighth day? What does the entire transaction show? 

(48) What is typed by the Nazarite's renewing his vow? What is typed by the former days' failing? By the Nazarite's bringing the ram as a trespass offering? What does the antitype imply? Why? What else is typed by his bringing a ram? 

(49) Of what does the rest of the chapter treat? From what time onward are the antitypical things done? Why did the type require them to be done on the day the vow was fulfilled? What was Jehovah's viewpoint therein? What fact shows this? Give several illustrations of Jehovah's unusual typical viewpoints. What shows the second viewpoint to be the one used in Num. 6? What corrected translation is suggested in v. 13? What does the corrected clause teach—type and antitype? 

(50) What are the similarities and dissimilarities between the offerings of vs. 14-20 and those made for the priests in Lev. 8? To what do the dissimilarities assist us? What do the many typical sacrifices not show, and what do they show as to the Church's sacrifice? Mention the seven kinds of typical sacrifices and explain them as showing seven features of the one sacrifice of the Church. What do vs. 14-20 bring out with reference to the antitypical Nazarite's sacrifice? Mention the Nazarite's offerings and explain their antitypical details in respect to the he lamb, the ewe lamb and the ram. 

(51) What was present in the basket of Lev. 8:26 that 

Gospel-Age Sinners and Nazarites. 


was absent in the Nazarite's basket? What does its absence type? What is typed by his cake and wafer? What did the meat and drink offering type? How do they type these things? What is typed by the Nazarite's bringing them? 

(52) Whom does the priest to whom they were brought type? What is typed by his presenting these offerings? How is the antitypical Nazarite's co-operation typed? How does Jesus offer their sacrifices? How do they co-operate with Him therein? What mistake has been made on this subject, especially by the Amramites? Give Scriptural and experimental proofs of the Truth on this subject. 

(53) What is typed by the priest's offering the Nazarite's sin offering? burnt offering? peace offering? the basket of unleavened bread? the meat and drink offerings? 

(54) Why did the Nazarite cut off his hair? What did his hair type? Why could not the hair have been cut off at the beginning of the vow? What is represented by its being burnt in the fire under the peace offering? What proves this? When did the antitype begin? How long did it continue? Explain the harmony of the hair's being burned at the end of the vow with the antitype. What is typed by cutting off his hair at the gate of the court? 

(55) What is shown respectively in vs. 19 and 20? What does a shoulder imply, and what is thus symbolized by a shoulder? Why? What is typed by the Nazarite's waving the shoulder before the Lord, and that with the cake and wafer? Explain the appropriateness in the antitype of the wave offering occurring after the shaving. 

(56) Who else participated in the wave offering? How was the double participation likely performed? What did the priest do for the Nazarite? What did this type? What other figure suggests the same thought? What does the wave breast represent? Why? What did the heave thigh represent? Why? What did waving the breast and heaving the thigh type? Why? What is typed by the shoulder, the unleavened bread, the wave breast and heave thigh being given the priest? 

(57) What is not typed in v. 20 by the Nazarite's being allowed to drink wine? Why is the statement made? What is suggested by the expression, "beside that which his hand 



shall get"? What did it type in classes and individuals? Give examples in proof. What other thought is implied in the antitype? 

(58) What do vs. 22-27 furnish? Explain the commands through Moses to Aaron and his sons to bless—type and antitype. What conclusion should be drawn from Lev. 9:22, 23 as to the use of the hands in conferring the typical and antitypical blessing? How many parts did the blessing contain? Of how many subdivisions did each part consist? What three works of blessing do the antitypical Nazarites perform toward antitypical Israel? What were the two parts of each? 

(59) Quote the Aaronic benediction and briefly explain each of its three parts to bring out these three works of blessing, each one divided into two parts. By ministering these three double blessings what have the Truth servants put upon Israel? What two things should these considerations impel antitypical Israel to do? Antitypical Nazarites to do? 

Blessed is the man who hath not walked astray 

In counsel of the wicked, and in the way 

Of sinners hath not stood, and in the seat 

Of scorners hath not sat. But in the great 

Jehovah's Law is ever his delight, 

And in his Law he studies day and night. 

He shall be as a tree which planted grows 

By watery streams, and in his season knows 

To yield his fruit, and his leaf shall not fall, 

And what he takes in hand shall prosper all. 

Not so the wicked, but as chaff which fanned 

The wind drives, so the wicked shall not stand 

In judgment, or abide their trial then, 

Nor sinners in the assembly of just men. 

For the Lord knows the upright way of the just; 

And the way of bad men to ruin must.