The Watchtower — September 1, 1953

Why Seminaries Weaken Faith

A FREQUENT visitor at the Brooklyn Heights Kingdom Hall on Thursday evenings during the winter of 1952-3 was a psychologist who signed himself as “Rev.——————, Ph.D.” Why was he attending these meetings of Jehovah’s witnesses? Because he was looking for the truth? Apparently not, for he was a Protestant who was convinced that his church was the true one because of its “apostolic succession of bishops, elders and deacons”. Then why did he come? Because he recognized a powerful force at work among Jehovah’s witnesses; he saw an earnestness, a sincerity, a confidence, a conviction, an enthusiasm on the part of all. They had something that neither his nor other religious organizations had and he wanted to get his finger on it, to get at the cause, so as to be able to make use of it in his religious organization.

In discussions with him it was apparent that he was far from satisfied with the spiritual state of Christendom. Particularly was he critical of the clergy who performed their duties in a routine, mechanical, lukewarm way. And regarding a postgraduate course he took at a prominent theological seminary, he said that it seemed as if the purpose of it was to destroy the faith of those attending it so that they could go out and destroy the faith of others.

While that may seem to be a very strong statement, yet this Kingdom Hall visitor is not alone in recognizing that seminaries have a bad effect on those who attend them. For example, note the article, “Where Goes the ‘Glow’?” that appeared in The Christian Century, April 29, 1953. Under the heading “Going in Hot, Coming out Cold”, the writer, a Mr. Samuel M. Shoemaker, who describes himself as “one who is constantly putting the claims of the Christian ministry before young men in college”, had the following to say:

“Why does it happen so often that a man who goes into a theological seminary warm or even hot in his conviction comes out cool or even cold? In some of the larger and more intellectual seminaries, a rather shocking proportion of men (more than a fourth, I am told) never go into the ministry at all. Is this all weeding out the unfit, shaking off the men who can’t meet the intellectual demands? Or does a great deal represent a spiritual failure on the part of the seminary? Among those who find their way eventually into the ministry there will be a considerable group that seems more puzzled than radiant, more conscious of the problems that religion raises, than of the solutions it offers when genuinely practiced. . . . I am troubled about what the seminaries do to so many of them.”

Illustrating his point, this writer told of an enthusiastic and outstanding undergraduate of one of the foremost universities who went to a highly reputable theological school, where he was “turned into about as regular-issue, lackluster, conventional a parson as you could find in a day’s search. . . . There used to be a shine to him. But there is no shine today, or little. Where did it go?”

What a commentary on the results of theological seminary training! If there is one place where a man should have his faith, his zeal, his enthusiasm, his “spiritual glow”, his intensity and ardor for God’s service increased, it certainly should be at an institution dedicated to the training of ministers. Yet here is proof that just the opposite takes place. Why?

Mr. Shoemaker, our critic of theological seminaries, would have us believe that the fault lies in a lack of personal dealing with the students on the part of the teachers, as well as a lack of ease and effectiveness on their part when they do deal personally with their students. He also would see a weakness in emphasizing head knowledge to the neglect of experimental religion. He points to the personal instruction that Jesus must have given to his little band of immediate followers during the some three years that he was with them.

True, the accounts of Christ’s earthly ministry are filled with references to his giving personal instruction, and we may be sure that he gave his twelve apostles during the time they were with him far more instruction than is recorded; not to say anything of his personally instructing Nicodemus, the woman at the well, and others. But was that the reason why his teaching was so effective? Or was it because of his faith in the Hebrew Scriptures as God’s inspired Word, his understanding and appreciation of them, and because of his ability to make them clear to others?

He was effective because of his strong faith and confidence. That is why “the crowds were astounded at his way of teaching; for he was teaching them as a person having authority, and not as their scribes”. He was effective because he understood God’s Word and made it clear to his hearers, as can be seen from the statement made by the two with whom he spoke on his resurrection morning on the way to Emmaus: “Were not our hearts burning as he was speaking to us on the road, as he was fully opening up the Scriptures to us?” (Matt. 7:28, 29; Luke 24:32, NW) And what was true of Christ was true of his apostles and other early disciples, such as Stephen and Apollos.

When the modern theological student enters his seminary “hot” and comes out “cold”, clearly something has happened to his faith. What? Can it be that it has weakened because his teachers were unable to satisfactorily answer his questions, such as: Why the mystery of the trinity? Since there is only one name under heaven assuring salvation, what is the destiny of the multitudes who never heard of it? Why a future judgment day if one goes to his eternal reward at death? Why are petty differences allowed to separate so-called Christian organizations?

And will a study of higher criticism—which views with strong suspicion all Bible claims regarding its origin, preservation and authenticity—strengthen or weaken faith? And what about evolution? The Bible account of creation satisfies reason and inspires gratitude; but can the changing and conflicting theories and speculations of evolution do either? And how strengthening to faith are the courses in psychology with their maze of uncertainty and confusion?

In view of all the foregoing, is it any wonder that the theological students upon graduating have lost whatever ‘glow of the spirit’ they may have had when entering their seminary? What gives the ministers of Jehovah their spiritual glow is their appreciation that “the word of God is alive and exerts power”.—Heb. 4:12, NW.

The Fleshly Body of Jesus

WHEN Jesus was on earth was he really fully a human creature? Was he altogether a man? or was he an incarnation, part man and part spirit, divinity clothed upon with a fleshly body and appearing to be human, but yet partly spiritual, divine?

The Scriptures abound with evidence that Jesus was God’s high priest and underwent temptations such as humans are susceptible to. (Matt. 4:1-11; Heb. 2:17, 18) Does it not seem unreasonable that Christ Jesus would practice deception or would appear to be something that he really was not? Would it not be deception for the Son of God in the flesh to claim to be suffering all the temptations and undergoing all the hardships to prove himself to be a worthy high priest for mankind and really not be a man, but be above the possibilities of human temptation and sin?

Jesus was on earth to prove his blameless integrity, to be the perfect answer to Satan’s challenge that Jehovah God could not put men on the earth who would be faithful to him under the Devil’s assaults. If he was not a man, would he not have failed to answer Satan’s challenge? Jesus, God’s only-begotten Son, the Word, became flesh. The apostle John says: “So the Word became flesh.” (John 1:14, NW) Yes, he was no incarnation or materialization of a spirit person to a fleshly body parading as a man during his 33 1⁄2-year residence on earth in the flesh. He was a perfect man, having a perfect human body of flesh and blood, a perfect human organism.

THE MIRACLE OF JESUS’ HUMANITY

How, then, was it accomplished that this One, with a past of untold millions of years in the heavens, became a human and was lowered to this position to fulfill God’s purposes? Jehovah God, by his almighty power, was able to take the personality of his only-begotten Son, his life pattern, with its tested qualities of integrity over millions of years of faithful service, its complete and whole-hearted devotion to Jehovah God, and put this personality within the reproductive powers of the tiny bundle of live energy that he inserted into the womb of the virgin Mary. Thus the child Jesus was born with all the marvelous qualities of integrity in him just as a child inherits qualities from his father. Also, according to God’s laws governing inheritance Jesus received from his mother Mary certain features of body and certain of Mary’s faithful and loving characteristics. But having a perfect Father as his life source, he did not inherit imperfection from his imperfect mother Mary. He was not another personality or a different person, but he was the only-begotten Son and was able to identify himself later as such. By process of natural growth Jesus matured: “And the young child continued growing and getting strong, being filled with wisdom, and God’s favor continued upon him.”—Luke 2:40, NW.

The fact that Jesus was not an incarnation or a materialization is proved by the cases where his body tired and was refreshed by rest and food. (Mark 4:38; 6:30-33; Luke 8:23; John 4:6) This shows that he understood what it meant to be tired, that he had merely a human body with its capacities and limitations as designed by God, yet being perfect and able to live forever just as Adam and Eve’s bodies could have existed forever had they remained faithful.

When Jesus was baptized at the age of thirty he was a perfect man, the exact equivalent of Adam, who was perfect in Eden. Jehovah accepted Jesus’ dedication and put upon him the obligation by which Jesus would sacrifice his perfect human life as a ransom for the sins of all mankind. Now God would not accept a sacrifice that had any blemish or fault in it, but only that which was perfect. (Ex. 12:5; Deut. 15:21; 1 Pet. 1:19; Matt. 3:17) Therefore we can see that the thirty-year-old Jesus, although he ate the food that was eaten by the people of his day, was not deteriorated in body by it, but remained perfect.

At the time that he was baptized by John in Jordan the heavens were opened to him, meaning that he received an understanding of things in the heavens. At this time, then, and during his forty-day temptation and training period in the wilderness, it was recalled to him that he had had prehuman existence with the Father. Now, merged with his personality was all the remembrance of his past life, and his personality was greatly enriched and strengthened by having these things recalled to him.

JESUS’ FLESHLY BODY DISSOLVED

What happened to the perfect fleshly body of Jesus after his death? Was it preserved so that in time men will look upon it in worship? or does Jesus still have this fleshly body in the heavens, “spiritualized” so that it can be seen and worshiped? Neither. The Scriptures answer: It was disposed of by Jehovah God, dissolved into its constituent elements or atoms.

Jesus was the antitype foreshadowed by Moses, the great mediator and leader of the congregation of Israel. God himself disposed of Moses’ body by burial, and “no man knoweth of his sepulchre”. (Deut. 34:5, 6) Later, one of the Christian writers says that Michael had a dispute with the Devil over the body of Moses. (Jude 9) The Devil desired to get the body of Moses the great leader and to use it as an object of worship to draw the Israelites away from their true invisible Commander and Leader, Jehovah God. With stronger desire the Devil wanted to obtain the fleshly body of Jesus after his death to induce some to worship it and use it for indecent false religious purposes, thus reproaching Jehovah God. But Jehovah thwarted the Devil’s purpose in both cases by disposing of the bodies of these two faithful men.

Moses’ body returned to the dust by process of decay, as all human bodies do, but not so in Jesus’ case, for it is written: “For thou wilt not leave my soul to Sheol; neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption.” (Ps. 16:10, AS; Acts 2:31) So God caused Jesus’ body to disappear, but not corrupt, meaning that it was dissolved, disintegrated back into the elements from which all human bodies are made.—John 20:1-13.

JESUS RESURRECTED WITH SPIRIT ORGANISM

The resurrected Jesus was given a spirit body: “He being put to death in the flesh, but being made alive in the spirit.” (1 Pet. 3:18, NW) “Whom not one of men has seen or can see.” (1 Tim. 6:16, NW) Paul merely caught a glimpse of the glory of Jesus’ spirit body and was blinded. (1 Cor. 15:8; Acts 9:17, 18) At the resurrection of his faithful followers in whom God has cultivated heavenly hopes they will be given, not fleshly, but glorious spirit bodies. We all know what a fleshly body is like. But John says: “Beloved ones, now we are children of God, but as yet it has not been made manifest what we shall be. We do know that whenever he is made manifest we shall be like him, because we shall see him just as he is.”—1 John 3:2, NW.

When Jesus was on earth he was said to be “lower than the angels”. Man is lower than angels. Certainly one who is in the flesh is lower than one who is in the spirit. God often contrasts flesh and spirit. (Ps. 8:4, 5; Heb. 2:9; Isa. 31:3) Could you believe that Jesus Christ, the majestic King of the new world, made higher than all other creation, would remain in a body of flesh? He would be inferior to a spirit and far too limited to accomplish the marvelous things required of such King, among them the destroying of the mighty spirit person Satan the Devil.

A human body requires earthly elements for its continued existence. It is made for the earth and must subsist upon the things produced from the earth. (1 Cor. 15:40, 47; Isa. 45:12, 18) God does not violate his own laws that he has established to govern natural things. Therefore he would not take a human body out of its proper habitation and transfer it to the heavens, the realm of spirit persons.

HIS POST-RESURRECTION APPEARANCES

What about the bodies in which Jesus appeared after his resurrection? He manifested himself on one occasion in a body that had wounds into which Thomas was able to place his hands to prove that Jesus was the same person, resurrected, whom Thomas had known as the Master. But if Jesus took his human body to heaven to keep these wounds forever, this would be contrary to God’s laws governing fleshly bodies and their ability to repair themselves. Moreover, if Jesus sacrificed his human body for the life of the world and then took it back, retaining it for himself, he could not offer such merit before God in behalf of others. The ransom would be taken back, leaving mankind still in their sins.

So these bodies that Jesus appeared in after his resurrection were materialized bodies. Similar instances occurred in ancient times, such as when the three men visited and ate with Abraham, and those appearing to Lot, in each case being angels who materialized in the form of men. Jesus’ materialized bodies were signs, evidences to eyewitnesses proving he had been resurrected according to the promise of Jehovah God.—Gen. 18:1-22; 19:1-16; John 20:29-31.

The proofs that these were bodies materialized for the occasion are many. Mary, when she first saw Jesus after his resurrection, did not recognize him, thinking that he must be the gardener. On the road to Emmaus, he was recognized by his manners and actions, not by his facial features. (John 20:14-16; Luke 24:13-32; Mark 16:12) When he materialized a body with wound marks to convince the doubtful Thomas, Jesus appeared in a room with locked doors. (John 20:26-28) This shows that he could materialize and dematerialize a body instantaneously. Scientists claim the ability to make material substance out of pure energy. How easy for the power of the resurrected Jesus, then, to materialize a body!

Now about the scripture that says: “While they were speaking of these things he himself stood in their midst and said to them: ‘May you have peace.’ But they were terrified, and because they became frightened they were imagining they beheld a spirit. So he said to them: ‘Why are you troubled, and why is it doubts come up in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; feel me and see, because a spirit does not have flesh and bones just as you behold that I have.’” (Luke 24:36-39, NW) Surely, some will contend, this shows that he was not a spirit, but a “spiritualized” fleshly body. No, but these men thought that they saw a vision, or a manifestation to them such as the manifestation of the angel to Daniel, which caused him to fall down with fear.—Dan. 10:4-9.

Since flesh and blood cannot inherit God’s kingdom, Jesus could not go to heaven with a fleshly body. “Ah,” some will argue, “Jesus did not here say he was flesh and blood, but flesh and bones.” But would it have been reasonable for Jesus to say, ‘See, I am flesh and blood,’ when no blood was running from his body? But it was easily evident to the senses of sight and touch that he had flesh and bones.

So then, those who refuse to recognize the signs of Jesus’ invisible presence because of looking for his coming in a body of flesh are mistaken. So also those who try to worship him today as the baby Jesus, in the face of the evidence that he grew to human manhood, died and was resurrected a mighty spirit person. It is not the baby Jesus that God commanded all to worship, nor the fleshly body, but Christ Jesus the glorified heavenly King of the new world.

Kingdom Hall Stoning Protested

CHRIST JESUS foretold that his followers would “be hated by all the nations on account of my name”. (Matt. 24:9, NW) Among the ways in which this hatred manifests itself is by the stoning of the Kingdom Halls of Jehovah’s witnesses. However, not all people who note such stonings approve of them. Men of good will, lovers of righteousness and of freedom of worship, often strongly protest such acts of bigotry and intolerance. For example, on April 23, 1953, the Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s witnesses in Easton, Pennsylvania, was stoned for the second time, and that while a congregational meeting was in progress. The Easton Express said editorially:

VANDALISM OR BIGOTRY

“It might have been just a release of unbridled young energy, which often results in what adults term ‘vandalism’, that caused the stoning of windows at Kingdom Hall, Easton, during a congregational meeting of Jehovah’s witnesses Thursday night. But inasmuch as it was the second such occurrence, one might ponder the possibility of a deeper and more serious motive, despite the fact that youngsters apparently were involved. A juvenile who expresses prejudice against minority religions and races usually is reflecting prejudices transmitted by adults or environment.

“To apprehend and punish the children involved in the Kingdom Hall stoning incidents would be of no avail, if religious minority prejudices are at the base of this action. It might be a signal of a broader social ill, with the remedy lying in adult education. The Witnesses are a quiet minority sect, entitled to the same constitutional protections as any other faith; it is their right to worship in any manner they choose, as long as it does not infringe on the rights or impede the free movement of others. Parents who believe in the American way will impress this basic tenet of freedom on the minds of their children.”

The stoning of the Easton Kingdom Hall caused one Jewish businessman to offer a reward of $100 for information leading to the arrest of the guilty persons. Reporting on both the incident and this offer the Easton Express stated:

“Flying glass sprayed the interior of the hall, the missiles endangering worshipers. There has been an indignant community reaction to the assault. Mr. Malkin said he is offering the reward solely ‘in the interest of preservation of human rights and freedoms. Outrages of this type against minorities cannot be allowed to go unchallenged,’ he declared. ‘The future security of America is based on the maintenance of individual and minority freedoms. If this sort of thing can happen to the Jehovah’s Witnesses, it could happen to any church or religious group. If those who perpetrated this outrage are caught and punished, it will be the best thing that ever happened to Easton.’”

It is apparent that Mr. Malkin is familiar with recent world history. How so? Because one of the very first groups to be suppressed by Adolf Hitler was Jehovah’s witnesses.

The Monastic Essenes

HAVE you ever heard of the Essenes? No? Well, that is not at all surprising. Although they lived in Palestine in Christ’s time, they were so small and insignificant a sect that not once are they mentioned in the Scriptures. What we know about them has been handed down to us by Josephus, Philo and Pliny the Elder. The trustworthiness of these writers leaving something to be desired, it is not surprising to find that there are differences among scholars concerning these Essenes.

Particularly upon Josephus are we dependent for what is known regarding the Essenes, he having had firsthand knowledge of them. Although Josephus himself was a Pharisee, and although the Essenes numbered only some four thousand members, yet we find him devoting ten times as much space to the Essenes as he does to the Pharisees and Sadducees. Why should Josephus devote so much space to the Essenes when the Bible writers ignored them entirely? Because the Bible writers were simply concerned with giving an accurate record of the momentous events that occurred in their day, whereas Josephus, a Jew, living in a Rome saturated with the Greek culture, was chiefly concerned with making a good impression upon the Romans, and he found the Essenes particularly useful for this purpose, as they had taken on more of the Greek philosophy than had any other Jewish sect.

It is of interest to note that the Dead Sea Sectaries, writers of the Dead Sea scroll of Isaiah and other scrolls found near the Dead Sea in 1947, appear to have been Essenes; for among the scrolls found was a manual of their customs and activities, which bears a most striking resemblance to what Josephus has to say about the Essenes. Where there is a distinct difference this can be explained on the grounds that Josephus colored his account so as to make the Essenes seem to have more of the Grecian culture than was actually the case.

Why term the Essenes monastic? Because they had a “monastic organization”, one “analogous to monastic institutions of a later date”. They were a sect of mystic ascetics, severely curbing the flesh and giving the Scriptures a mystical or allegorical meaning. They seem to have developed gradually, their exact origin being unknown. First mention of them was made at the time of the Maccabees, about 150 years before Christ. Their religious views were colored by either Grecian or Persian philosophy, and so it is not to be wondered at that they believed in the immortality of the soul and in predestination.

Some, such as McClintock & Strong’s Cyclopædia, hold that they actually were extreme Pharisees, those who practiced celibacy, for the most part, and who carried the Pharisaical teachings to their logical extreme, rather than by means of sophistry trimming their teachings to suit their convenience, as was the case with Pharisees in general. Among the points that the Essenes and Pharisees had in common were: the consideration of the social meal as a sacrament; bathing each time before they partook of it; bathing each time after easing nature; covering the lower part of the body with a small apron when bathing; four grades or classes of purity within the sect; considering an assembly for worship as sacred if ten persons, a complete number, were present; abstinence from oaths; refusal to move a vessel on the sabbath.

CUSTOMS OF THE ESSENES

There is much conflicting opinion as to why this sect of the Jews was called “Essenes”. In fact, some twenty different explanations are given, most of which have to do with their peculiar customs, such as their being “silent ones”, “seers,” “pious ones,” “physicians,” “brothers,” “retired or secluded ones.”

The Essenes lived chiefly in rural communities and were presided over by a president who also acted as judge, and who was elected by all the members of the community. They engaged in various kinds of farming, raising grain, flocks, bees, etc., and made their own clothes; to procure anything from outsiders would have defiled them. They held everything in common and were opposed to slavery and war. They adopted the children of others, not having any of their own.

Rising early in the morning they began the day by prayer, facing the sun, a form of sun worship. No secular conversation could be engaged in until after the morning worship. Then they went about their duties. At the fifth hour, or about eleven o’clock, they bathed, put on white robes and assembled in their refectory or sacred dining hall for their meal, which consisted of very plain food. It was presided over by the priest and, aside from his giving thanks at the beginning and end of the repast, no one spoke. Then they put on their work clothes again and labored until the close of day.

In addition to farming and related activities, they concerned themselves with the healing arts, especially making use of roots for medicine. They were also concerned with doing deeds of charity to others. Having turned all their funds in to the common treasury they would often be in need when traveling, and so each Essene community had a steward whose business it was to supply needy Essene strangers with food and clothing.

On the sabbath they assembled in their synagogues for worship, which consisted primarily of reading and discussion of the Scriptures. They were seated according to age, and laughter, spitting and speaking out of turn were severely punished. They observed the sabbath day, says Josephus, “stricter than any other of the Jews.” Not only did they refuse to warm any food or lift any vessel on the sabbath but they even went so far as refusing to go to the stool or ease the calls of nature on that day!

The Essenes refused to anoint themselves, considering ointment or any oil as unclean, whereas actually, in view of the heat, it was almost imperative to make use of such to stay clean. They considered it a good thing to be sweaty; body odors evidently did not annoy them. Although dressed in white, they did not change their clothes or their shoes until these were completely worn out or in pieces.

One who wanted to become a member of the Essenes had first of all to turn over to the sect all his wealth, upon which he received a small spade, with which to dig a hole when he wanted to ease himself, a small apron for use when bathing and the white robe. (Deut. 23:13) During the first year he was compelled to live apart from the sect although adhering strictly to its rules. Then he was allowed to join the sect in their bathing but still not allowed to eat with them until two more years of probation. If he adhered strictly to all the rules of the sect for three years, then, upon taking “tremendous oaths”, as Josephus calls them, tremendous both in what they required and the penalties involved, he was fully initiated into the sect.

These oaths, the only ones permitted to the Essenes, vowed honesty, purity, loyalty to the sect and secrecy regarding certain features of it. Among those that were to be kept secret were “the names of the angels”, which included the secrets concerning the tetragrammaton (the four Hebrew letters making up God’s name, the Anglicized form being “Jehovah”) and other names of God and the angels. Violation of any of the rules was punished by cutting down one’s food and, in the case of excommunication, denying it altogether. Since the Essenes considered all food unclean except that prepared by them, some offenders even starved to death because of such penalties. Upon repentance they were to be forgiven and restored to fellowship and food.

THE FILTHY RAGS OF SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS

Josephus praises the Essenes highly for their piety and charity and records several instances in which they are purported to have accurately foretold certain events. He lauds them for the great affection they had for one another, for rejecting all pleasures as evil and for considering continence and conquest over the flesh a great virtue. “Holding righteous indignation in reserve, they are masters of their temper, champions of fidelity, very ministers of peace.”

God’s Word tells us that our own righteousness or good works are as filthy rags or a polluted garment. (Isa. 64:6) Basically, it was in just these filthy rags that the Essenes placed their whole confidence. The law of God as given by Moses did not convince them of their need of a sin-atoning sacrifice. They ignored its provisions for typical cleansing by trespass and sin offerings and the day of atonement sacrifices. When John the Baptist came they likewise ignored his message and provision for a representative cleansing by means of immersion in the Jordan; and when Christ Jesus came they ignored him as well as his sacrifice, which alone could bring man into a condition of being declared righteous by God.

Some claim to see a relationship between the Essenes and John the Baptist’s abstemious course, dwelling in the wilderness, not drinking wine, and living in a celibate state; but in view of the foregoing it might be observed that there was as much similarity between John the Baptist and the Essenes as there is between a human living infant and a papier-maché doll. Others would have us believe that when Jesus spoke of some making themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of the heavens and when Paul spoke about the gift of singleness they had in mind the Essenes. (Matt. 19:11, 12; 1 Cor. 7:37) Such a conclusion is likewise due to a failure to appreciate the difference in purpose between the Scriptural course and that of the Essenes. The most important truths of the hope of mankind being in God’s kingdom and in the Messiah the Essenes completely overlooked.

While there was one group among the Essenes that married, the great majority of them considered themselves too righteous to touch a woman, deprecating especially woman’s vicissitudes, and to make it easier for them to hold to their unnatural course they persuaded themselves that women tempted them to lasciviousness and that none of them preserved their fidelity to one man.

To all reasonable minds, the efforts of the Essenes to be overmuch righteous must appear ridiculous. (Eccl. 7:16) What difference did it make to the Almighty God Jehovah whether or not they took a bath after each time they heeded a call of nature to ease themselves? or whether or not they eased themselves on the sabbath? or whether they expectorated to the right hand or to the left? or whether or not they wore their clothes and shoes until they were entirely in rags?

Did God recognize the fine distinctions of four classes or grades among them whereby one of a higher grade could not touch one of a lower class without becoming unclean? Did he also consider all the Essenes so much better than the rest of men that for them to touch a stranger would make them unclean? Would he rather have them starve to death than eat something prepared by non-Essenian hands, and therefore supposedly unclean?

Is not all such a striking example of what Jehovah condemned at Isaiah 65:5, 6 (AT): “Who say, ‘Stand off; come not near me, lest I make you taboo!’ These men are a smoke in my nostrils, a fire that burns continually. See! it stands written before me: ‘I will not keep silent, until I have requited—until I have requited on their bosom their own sins.’” Or as the common version expresses it: “Stand by thyself, come not near to me; for I am holier than thou.” Josephus and others may praise the Essenes, but Jesus’ words to the Pharisees can also be properly directed to them, especially since they may actually have been Pharisees: “You are those who declare yourselves righteous before men, but God knows your hearts; because what is lofty among men is a disgusting thing in God’s sight.”—Luke 16:15, NW.

Josephus had about a hundred times as much to say about the Essenes as about Christ and the Christians. Which, however, has history shown to be of greater moment in that first century A.D., the doings of the sect of the Essenes or what Christ and his followers accomplished?

No General Motors of Religion!

● The most astounding insight into interfaith was given by Dr. Norman Vincent Peale of New York’s Marble Collegiate Church in the American magazine, June, 1948. He used this example: “A generation ago a number of different companies which made many different kinds of motorcars were combined into one great corporation This corporation did not scrap all the old models and produce only one kind of car. It has continued to turn out many different models, to meet the preferences of customers, but by merging companies it has vastly increased the efficiency of its operation and thus made more cars available to more people than was ever possible before.” That is his proposal in the way of interfaith; keep all sorts of ideas to satisfy the customers. Pure worship and right doctrine are relegated to a secondary position. Such interfaithers want to satisfy the people, not God; to please their salary-payers, to let the customers say what they expect of their religion, rather than letting it tell what God expects of them. They are more concerned about interfaith than true faith, and anyone who does not approve of their broad religious course they consider “narrow”. They would not have liked Christ’s separateness at all. In contradiction of their theory, he said: “Narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it.” The wise will follow his warning, investigate, study, know the reason for their faith, accept only what can be absolutely proved, and will hold narrowly to pure doctrine—the only course that really leads to life!—Matt. 7:13, 14, NW; 1 Thess. 5:21.

Nigerian Freedom of Worship Upheld

THE enemies of Jehovah’s servants have ever brought false charges against them, as the Bible repeatedly shows. However, at times these false accusations have boomeranged, as in the case of Daniel. A modern example of the wicked digging a pit by means of false accusations and then falling into it themselves is here given as reported by the Society’s branch office at Nigeria, Africa:

“Because of their refusal to take sides in a land dispute and particularly because of their preaching activities, the small congregation of Christian witnesses of Jehovah at Ode Irele, Nigeria, became the victims of a conspiracy. Two were arrested and thrown into the local jail after a kangaroo court had convicted them on seven false charges. An urgent appeal for help was sent to the British district officer, who summoned the chiefs and the imprisoned witnesses before him for investigation.

“The accusations were examined. First, the refusal to pay taxes. To the consternation of his accusers the witness for Jehovah reached into his pocket and brought out his tax receipts for the past ten years. The charge was indignantly struck out by the officer. The second charge was that the brothers refused to join in community road building. Witnesses were called who testified that the two brothers were always first in reporting for such duty, and so that charge was struck out. The third charge was that of preaching against the government. ‘What have you to say to that?’ the officer asked the brothers. One replied: ‘You represent the government. If we were against the government, why would we appeal to you for help? We believe this government is one of the best at present and we are grateful for the freedom we enjoy under British rule; but we are bound to say that soon God’s government will be here, and that will be better than any other.’ In similar manner the remaining charges were dealt with and disposed of.

“Strongly rebuking the conspiring chiefs, the district officer demanded to know the real reason for this conspiracy. Then the truth came out. Many people were getting interested in the message that the Christian witnesses of Jehovah were bringing to them, and as a result church attendance and contributions were falling off. ‘We do not want Jehovah’s witnesses in our town,’ the chiefs said. The district officer then explained to them that they were living under a democracy where freedom of worship was guaranteed. ‘I give you permission to drive Jehovah’s witnesses out of your town,’ he said, ‘on one condition. First you drive out the Catholics, then the Baptists, then the Methodists and all the others. Then, when you have done that, you have my permission to drive out Jehovah’s witnesses last.’ He furthermore forbade them to try any more cases involving Jehovah’s witnesses in their native court, insisting that any charges against them be brought before him personally. In conclusion he stated, ‘I will not entertain any more complaints against Jehovah’s witnesses for the next six months.’

“Then things began to happen. Greatly crestfallen, the head chief returned to his new car to go back home, but he was unable to get it started. Mechanics were called but they were unable to help and the car remained stranded for three weeks. Back home the chiefs found that the prison wall where the brothers had been incarcerated had collapsed, and at the native court, where the conspiracy had been hatched, they found that the roof had fallen in. Now the brothers are planning to build a new Kingdom Hall, for since the trouble started the number of witnesses for Jehovah in Ode Irele has increased from sixteen to ninety-three.”

Standing on Street Corners

UNDER that title the Episcopal Churchnews for March 15 carried the following editorial, which we quote by their kind permission:

“You find them everywhere, in the busiest part of the big cities. At General Convention in Boston they stood where the street-corner concentration of round collars was thickest, and patiently, politely, held out copies of The Watchtower. More than one cleric hastily succumbed to curiosity and made a purchase, which he stuck into his pocket for future reading.

“Meanwhile, the members of Jehovah’s Witnesses make themselves unpopular by refusing to salute the flag and by going to jail rather than to war. Our tendency—reasonable and respectable people that we are—is to brush them off from our consciousness, to murmur ‘those fringe people’ and pour another cup of tea or the second cocktail.

“But suppose we have a look at a copy of The Watchtower and see how the world appears to the ‘peculiar people’ who are equally ready to stand on street corners or go to jail for their faith. We find first of all that a knowledge of English is not needed for the salvation which the Witnesses proclaim. The Watchtower can be had in thirty-eight other tongues, including Indonesian, Tagalog, Silozi, Twi, and Yoruba (we aren’t making these names up). We wish we could say the same thing for Episcopal Churchnews.

“As one reads through The Watchtower, what word best describes the feeling running through all its articles? Perhaps the word is ‘urgency.’ Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Christ returned in 1914 and is now reigning, though invisibly; that we are living at 5 minutes of twelve and the final culmination of history is visibly shaping up; that it is now or never—choose God and partake of the resurrection of the righteous; deny Him and your existence will be blacked out and annihilated.

“Jehovah’s Witnesses are in a hurry. They believe the time is very short, and that the decision each must make is a plain Yes or a plain No; that Yes is the password into everlasting life, and No the invitation to extinction.

“They are more right than otherwise. As Episcopalians we do not try to work out God’s timetable; we dare not predict the split second of Christ’s return. But we have His promise that He will return. And for the individual, each second of this present life is as fraught with eternal consequences as the Witnesses say it is. We are choosing now, this day, this moment; our big decisions and little decisions are adding up to the final decision.

“When we begin to know this in our bones and our blood, perhaps something new will be seen on the face of the earth: Episcopalians (lay or clerical) standing at street corners, with tracts in their hands. And they will look across the street at the Watchtower salesman and wave a friendly greeting to him. However much they may differ, they are members of the Brotherhood of the Urgent.”

Appreciating The Watchtower

How do you feel about The Watchtower? Like the reader who wrote as follows? “The Watchtower is the most delicious morsel we’ve ever tasted. Each one gets tastier (if possible). No humdrum about our menu! It’s so good we can hardly digest one until we look forward to another. Have you ever gone into an exclusive candy kitchen and wondered how to choose what you want when you saw so many, many lovely kinds? I feel that way spiritually about The Watchtower. There is so much to study that I hardly know where to begin. Then when I begin, I can’t quit until I have to go and tell someone else about it, or discuss it with them. And so it goes. Never a dull moment!”

Helping Prisoners to Secure Freedom

IN CREATING man in his own image God included the faculty of a free will. (Gen. 1:26) Due to man’s disobedience, however, he has brought himself into many forms of bondage. In their efforts to get rid of some of these bonds men have sacrificed much treasure and blood; such as in World War II, the goal of which was the four freedoms of speech, of religion, from fear and from want. But man, instead of getting more freedom, has since then been shackled by even heavier chains as an ever-increasing portion of the world becomes enslaved to the totalitarian monstrosity and the rest of the world groans under the burdens of equipping itself to resist aggression. Why such failure? Because, as the apostle Peter tells us: “While they are promising them freedom, they themselves are existing as slaves of corruption.”—2 Pet. 2:19, NW.a

However, it is not Jehovah’s purpose to always have the world part free and part slave. No, he is a God of freedom and so has given us the assurance that not only his spiritual sons but “the creation itself also will be set free from enslavement to corruption and have the glorious freedom of the children of God”.—Rom. 8:21, NW.

What kind of freedom does God hold out to us? Not absolute freedom, for by its very nature only One could have such a freedom, the One who is almighty and supreme, namely, Jehovah God. He alone has such freedom that none can question him as to his actions. (Isa. 45:11, 12) All others can have only a relative freedom, freedom compatible with their obligations to Jehovah as their Sovereign and Benefactor. He created us for his purpose, and the use of the free will that he gave us must be limited by that purpose. And since we are sharing this earth with others we may not exercise our free will to the extent of depriving others of what we want for ourselves.—Gal. 5:13-15, NW.

How is this freedom that God provides for us to be obtained? Fundamentally, its legal right is assured us by the ransom sacrifice of Christ Jesus, which assures us freedom from bondage to sin, Satan’s organization and death. Complete freedom from this threefold bondage, however, lies in the future and will be fully realized in the new world only at the end of the thousand-year rule of God’s kingdom.—Isa. 65:17, 21-23, 25; Rev. 20:5.

At present Jehovah holds out to us a measure of relative freedom. To realize this measure of freedom we must follow the advice and course set by Jesus: “If you remain in my word, you are really my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (John 8:31, 32, NW) What truth and understanding will give us this freedom? The truth regarding Jehovah’s supremacy and his purposes will give us freedom from the fear of man, from false religion and from selfishness. More specifically, it is the acquiring of an accurate knowledge of our relationship to Jehovah and what the boundaries of his freedom for us are. Appreciating those boundaries and acting in accord with such appreciation will give us the greatest possible freedom.

Having gained this freedom ourselves, let us use it, not as an excuse for moral badness but to help others to secure freedom. How can we do this? By cherishing our Christian freedom, by demonstrating its priceless value before all men, and by proclaiming ‘liberty throughout all the land’, by saying to the prisoners “Go forth!”

[Footnotes]

“Walk in the Name of Jehovah Our God for Ever”

With the following speech the president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society released Volume I of the “New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures” to the New World Society Assembly of Jehovah’s Witnesses at Yankee Stadium, New York city, N. Y., Wednesday afternoon, July 22, 1953.

“For all the peoples walk every one in the name of his god; and we will walk in the name of Jehovah our God for ever and ever.”—Mic. 4:5, AS and Da.

1. The “latter days” were foretold to be a time for making what, and how may one know one is right when making it?

THE “latter days” or final days of this old world were foretold to be a time of most important decision. This decision will affect the eternal destiny of each individual. It will prove whether he is worthy of eternal life in a righteous new world or not. How can a person know that his decision is the right one? He can know this unmistakably by his choice of the right God to worship. That is what makes the decision the most important one to make. The choice of the God who has promised and who can be depended upon to fulfill his promise to create a warless new world makes a person’s decision the right one. That there would be many gods among whom to choose and that some would choose the God who offers lasting peace, security and prosperity, the inspired prophecy indicated when it said:

2. How does Micah 4:1-5 indicate some would choose the right God?

² “But in the latter days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of Jehovah’s house shall be established on the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and peoples shall flow unto it. And many nations shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of Jehovah, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths. For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of Jehovah from Jerusalem; and he will judge between many peoples, and will decide concerning strong nations afar off: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig-tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of Jehovah of hosts hath spoken it. For all the peoples walk every one in the name of his god; and we will walk in the name of Jehovah our God for ever and ever.”—Mic. 4:1-5, AS.

3. Which people today is walking in the name of Jehovah as God, and how is this shown?

³ Both heavenly and human events since A.D. 1914 mark our days as the “latter days” or final days of this old world. (Matt. 24:3-39) Therefore, let everyone who reads Micah’s prophecy and looks for its fulfillment now ask himself, Who of all the peoples is it that is walking in the name of Jehovah as God? Is it the recently established republic of Israel or is it the Jewish people as a whole through whose faithful ancestors we have received the sacred Hebrew Scriptures? The answer must be No; for during the past nineteen centuries the name of the living and true God has not come to be known to mankind through such natural Jews. Who, then, by authentic records in law courts of the land, not excepting the United States Supreme Court, and by the reports in the newspapers, magazines, bulletins and books, both secular and religious, both friendly and hostile, yes, who by these records are indisputably shown to be the people that have chosen to walk in the name of Jehovah as their God for ever and ever? The honest, unbiased answer must be, Jehovah’s witnesses. Moreover, the enormous amount of literature that these people have distributed and the hundreds of thousands of public lectures that they have given in these latter days give answer to the same effect. Even the enemies are obliged to admit that in such witnesses of Jehovah alone this prophecy of Micah finds its fulfillment today.

4. How has the endeavor been made to remove all basis for the name by which these Christian witnesses are known?

⁴ For this reason in the last two decades the name of the Most High God has come under a great deal of discussion, and their foes claim that the witnesses do not have the correct name, although this name has been appearing in Bible translations for hundreds of years. Recently an endeavor was made to remove all basis for the name by which these Christian witnesses are known. How? By taking the very name of the Most High God out of the Bible translation. This was the case in the Revised Standard Version of the Holy Bible, published in 1952 and the publication of which was commercially advertised as the “greatest Bible news in 341 years”.

5. What most important decision did the translators of the Revised Standard Version have to make, and especially in view of what previous statement?

⁵ The Bible was written in Hebrew, Aramaic and common Greek originally; and in the Hebrew Scriptures the divine name is written as a Tetragrammaton or four Hebrew consonants, which correspond, in Latin, with JHVH, and in English, with YHWH. For centuries the name has been pronounced “Jehovah”, but within the last century Bible scholars have preferred the pronunciation “Yahweh” as more correct. The translators of the Revised Standard Version, being an American committee and succeeding to the committee that had produced the American Standard Version of 1901, had a most important decision to make regarding their translation, and that was with respect to the name of the Most High God. This was in view of paragraph 8 of the Preface of the American Standard Version, which reads:

I. The change first proposed in the Appendix [of the English Revised Version]—that which substitutes “Jehovah” for “LORD” and “GOD” (printed in small capitals)—is one which will be unwelcome to many, because of the frequency and familiarity of the terms displaced. But the American Revisers, after a careful consideration, were brought to the unanimous conviction that a Jewish superstition, which regarded the Divine Name as too sacred to be uttered, ought no longer to dominate in the English or any other version of the Old Testament, as it fortunately does not in the numerous versions made by modern missionaries. This Memorial Name, explained in Ex. iii. 14, 15, and emphasized as such over and over in the original text of the Old Testament, designates God as the personal God, as the covenant God, the God of revelation, the Deliverer the Friend of his people;—not merely the abstractly “Eternal One” of many French translations, but the ever living Helper of those who are in trouble. This personal name, with its wealth of sacred associations, is now restored to the place in the sacred text to which it has an unquestionable claim.

6. What action toward the divine name did the translation committee of the Revised Standard Version take, and for what stated reasons?

⁶ With the much heralded and widely celebrated release of the Revised Standard Version on September 30, 1952, the translation committee made known its decision to the world: the divine name had been denied its “unquestionable claim” to a place in the sacred text and had been ruled out completely. In paragraph seventeen of the preface of this new 1952 version the committee explains its reason for this decision, and in what it says it makes complete fools out of the American Standard Version committee regarding the divine name. Paragraph seventeen reads:

A major departure from the practice of the American Standard Version is the rendering of the Divine Name, the “Tetragrammaton.” The American Standard Version used the term “Jehovah”; the King James Version had employed this in four places, but everywhere else, except in three cases where it was employed as part of a proper name, used the English word LORD (or in certain cases GOD) printed in capitals. The present revision returns to the procedure of the King James Version, which follows the precedent of the ancient Greek and Latin translators and the long established practice in the reading of the Hebrew scriptures in the synagogue. While it is almost if not quite certain that the Name was originally pronounced “Yahweh,” this pronunciation was not indicated when the Masorétes added vowel signs to the consonantal Hebrew text. . . . For two reasons the Committee has returned to the more familiar usage of the King James Version: (1) the word “Jehovah” does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew; and (2) the use of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were other gods from whom he had to be distinguished, was discontinued in Judaism before the Christian era and is entirely inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church.

7. What question regarding this was put to the Christian conventioners at Yankee Stadium by the speaker?

⁷ You thousands of conventioners here at Yankee Stadium, who are baptized followers of the Lord Jesus Christ and who therefore represent a considerable portion of what is called “the Christian Church”, does that Revised Standard Version’s Preface speak for YOU? Do you agree that the “use of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were other gods from whom he had to be distinguished, . . . is entirely inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church”?

8. What did the apostle Paul say pertinent to this, and so how would he reply to the above statement?

⁸ How would the apostle Paul reply to that statement? He said: “Although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords’—yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.” (1 Cor. 8:5, 6, RS) The apostle Paul here stated that there are many creatures in heaven and on earth that are called either “gods” or “lords”. So, amid all the rival claims to godship, was it necessary for Paul’s God to be distinguished by a name to make him exclusive as the “one God”? We Christians confess that there is but the one God; yet his being the one God is disputed and denied by others, and there are a billion and a half people today who are worshiping countless other gods and to whom these gods are just as real as the one true God is to Bible Christians. It is therefore most appropriate for the Christian God to be distinguished by a name. Also, in the universe there are many that are called “lords”, although there is only one real Lord for Christians, and hence, too, it is appropriate and necessary for Christians to identify who their Lord is by the name Jesus Christ.

THE BIG POINT OF CRITICISM

9. How has the Revised Standard Version been criticized by some clergymen, and how with regard to its treatment of God’s name?

⁹ There have been quite a number of criticisms of the Revised Standard Version, some clergymen calling it “this modernist Bible”, “this new Bible of modernism.” But among the many critics of that version how many have shown appreciation for God’s name and have criticized it for barring his name out and hiding it from readers? We have at least one such criticism here as published in the New York newspaper Daily Compass, of October 28, 1952, and it comes from a Jewish editor. Here is part of what he writes on the Revised Standard Version: “The 32 Protestant scholars may have attempted to revise the Scriptures in the ‘clearest, most accurate English of our time,’ but in so doing, they actually obscured the original meanings. Moreover, by rendering some original Hebrew names, such as ‘Jehovah’ into English words that never convey the original meaning (’Jehovah’ is a compound of three tenses ‘I Was, I Am, I Will Be’), the translators have greatly transgressed and committed grievous sin. For by using the word ‘Lord’ for ‘Jehovah’ they only add confusion to the readers who will now not know when [the reference is to] Jehovah, the Creator of all, or to the accepted Christian Son who is so referred to throughout the evangelical works. ‘Lord,’ moreover, has several common meanings.”

10. How did the Catholic Confraternity’s Volume I of its Bible translation treat the name and what comment did it make as to it?

¹⁰ Two days before the release of the Revised Standard Version the Roman Catholic Confraternity of Christian Doctrine in America released Volume I of its edition of The Holy Bible, containing its first eight books, from Genesis to Ruth, inclusive. But this new American Catholic version follows the Douay Version, and the Douay Version never did use the name “Jehovah” in its main text. Hence we make no comment in this connection, except to quote from its footnote on Exodus 3:14 as to God’s name represented in the Hebrew text by the Tetragrammaton: “Out of reverence for this name, the term Adonai, ‘my Lord,’ was later used as a substitute. The word LORD in the present version represents this traditional usage. The word ‘Jehovah’ arose from a false reading of this name as it is written in the current Hebrew text.”

11. Has comment been properly expected from Jehovah’s witnesses regarding the Revised Standard Version, and with respect to what?

¹¹ However, some comment as to the Revised Standard Version has properly been expected from Jehovah’s witnesses. Those who have been aware of the omission of the sacred name from that version have watched to see what the witnesses would say about it. They have expected us to get into something of a furore over it. We have here the prediction of the religious magazine The Christian Century of three years ago, June 28, 1950, which says of the Revised Standard Version that was to come: “But Jehovah’s Witnesses have a way of holding their beliefs with passionate conviction. If the new version appears with the name of the Old Testament deity in any other form than ‘Jehovah,’ its translators can look forward to being under hot fire from the day the first copy comes off the press.” Five days after the new version was released, a religious clergyman published an article entitled “Revised, Easier to Read Version of the Bible” in the Chicago Sunday Tribune of October 5, 1952. In paragraph six he said this: “There are more than 300 words, the R.S.V. preface points out, that have entirely different meanings today than in the 17th century. The name Jehovah, for Lord or God, a purely manufactured word which appeared a few times in the King James version, is not used. [Jehovah’s Witnesses are greatly upset by this omission.]”

12. Why are we not upset by the name’s omission, and what do we feel justified in criticizing?

¹² Here in the presence of this tremendous international assembly of Jehovah’s witnesses in Yankee Stadium, with representatives of 91 lands on hand, we feel it is the proper occasion for us to say something in behalf of Jehovah’s witnesses, and so we do. If we were one of the 29 religious denominations that are members of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America, which has “authorized” the Revised Standard Version and holds the copyright for it, we should have valid reason to be upset greatly by the divine name’s omission. But we are glad we are not a member of that National Council. We do not criticize the Council for producing a new and modern version of the Bible. That is a commendable effort and work, and we expect to find it useful, making quotations out of it from time to time in the Watch Tower publications. What we do feel justified in criticizing is the great indignity that the translation committee has rendered to the grandest and most worthy name in the universe and the motives, stated and unstated, that prompted them to do this.

13. Why do we continue using the form “Jehovah”, and what is the basis for our criticism of the Revised Standard Version, to the shame of its Protestant translators?

¹³ If in the Revised Standard Version they had chosen to use the form of the name “Yahweh” instead of “Jehovah”, there would have been no room for criticism. We ourselves think the form “Yahweh” is nearer the true pronunciation. But as no one today knows the exact pronunciation due to an ancient false reverence in not pronouncing the holy name, we keep on using the form “Jehovah” for present purposes, until the divine Owner of the name himself reveals its correct pronunciation, be that by resurrecting the prophet Moses to whom he himself pronounced the name or otherwise. So the basis for our criticism of the Revised Standard Version is, not the disuse of the form “Jehovah”, but the omission of God’s name in any form whatever at all the 6,823 times where it occurs in the Hebrew text and instead the using of a confusing and undistinctive title, namely, “the LORD.” The procedure would stand to the shame of any translators that pretend to be Christian. Still more it stands to the great depreciation of the translation committee that claims to be Protestant when many modern versions that have recently come out or are still in process of coming out in English and other languages by Roman Catholic translators use the name “Jehovah” or other forms, such as Yahvé, Yahweh, Iahvē, Yahveh, Yavē, and Javé. We could name five such French Roman Catholic translations, two Spanish, and two British.a

14. What did an executive director of the National Council say in defense of the name’s omission?

¹⁴ Said an executive director of the copyright-holding National Council of Churches in defense of the omission: “We can never agree on the use of the name of God, so there is no need to discuss it. When I say ‘the Lord’, it automatically means God. It depends on what you wish to stress. God is God. He needs no name for me. I feel very near to Him and call Him my Father. I would never call my earthly father by his name—only those who don’t know him like I do need to do that—to distinguish him from other earthly fathers—there is only one God!”—October 8, 1952.

15. If it was enough for Jesus to address God as “My Father” and “Lord”, what do we ask regarding Jesus’ prayers?

¹⁵ In reply to this we say, Jesus Christ was closer to God than this executive director is and he too called God “My Father”. But if it was enough for Jesus Christ and his followers to call God “My Father”, then why did Jesus the Son of God in his sermon on the mount teach us to pray: “Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name”? Jesus also called his heavenly Father “Lord”, saying, “I thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth.” (Matt. 6:9; 11:25, RS) But if that was sufficient, why then did Jesus pray with his apostles the last night he was with them as a man and say: “I have manifested thy name to the men whom thou gavest me out of the world; . . . Holy Father, keep them in thy name which thou hast given me, that they may be one, even as we are one. While I was with them, I kept them in thy name which thou hast given me; . . . I made known to them thy name, and I will make it known”? Why, some days earlier, did he pray: “Father, glorify thy name,” in answer to which there was a voice from heaven, saying: “I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again”? (John 17:6, 11, 12, 26; 12:28, RS) Why all this?

16. Why did Jesus pray such things, and what does it denote to call our heavenly Father of his personal name?

¹⁶ It was because Jesus knew his Father had a distinctive name. As the Prophet Greater than Moses he said he had come in his Father’s name and not in his own name, and he wanted his followers to know the Father’s name. That is why in The Revelation he pictured his genuine, faithful followers as “having his Father’s name written in their foreheads”. (John 5:43; Rev. 14:1) There being only one God does not deny he has a name. Nor does he forbid his sons on earth to call him by his personal name, for to call him by his unique name does not denote undue familiarity and disrespect. Contrariwise, it denotes greater respect, awe and worship, more so than the childlike expression “Our Father” does.

A GOD-HONORING BIBLE VERSION

17. What is the position of children toward their father’s name, and how did James comment when God began bringing uncircumcised Gentiles into the congregation?

¹⁷ The afore-referred-to executive director of the National Council appears to be ashamed of the name of his god, the god whom he calls “Father”. If he is not ashamed of it, then why does he not want other people to know the name of his Father? It would be a big convenience to know it, for then when people who worship other gods with personal names wanted to talk about this director’s Father they could definitely mention his name instead of awkwardly saying, “Mr. T————’s God.” True sons of a father are not ashamed of his name. Rather than want to hide it from others who are not sons and who may reproach, abuse and misrepresent it or take it in vain, they are glad to stand up in defense of it and heap honor upon it. They show they are not illegitimate children by being able to give the name of their Father. The true congregation or church of the living God are spiritual sons of his. When God began to take believers out from the uncircumcised Gentiles and make them a part of the Christian congregation, the disciple James saw that the prophecy of Amos 9:11, 12 was fulfilled. So he said to the special conference of apostles and other older disciples in Jerusalem: “Symeon [Peter] has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, as it is written, ‘After this I will return, and I will rebuild the dwelling of David, which has fallen; . . . that the rest of men may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by my name, says the Lord, who has made these things known from of old.’”—Quoting Acts 15:13-18 from the RS.

18, 19. (a) How would that prophecy be meaningless, and yet how has God provided proof of the prophecy’s fulfillment today? (b) How has Jehovah made his people independent as to the basis for their name, and what did the convention speaker release in evidence of this?

¹⁸ If God had no name, then it would be meaningless for him to predict that the uncircumcised Gentiles would be called by his name and that he would take them out from the nations to be a “people for his name”, not for the name of Jesus, mind you! The prophecy could not fail. God promised to take out of all nations a people for his own name, and, whether men in or outside of Christendom like it or not, he does unmistakably have a name-people today, Jehovah’s witnesses! The divine name for which they stand and to which they bear witness cannot be wiped out by omitting it from any modern translations of the Bible. If the English-speaking witnesses of Jehovah were dependent upon the 1952 English translations of the Bible for the way they are named to have a Scriptural basis, it would be something to be greatly upset about. But the Almighty God Jehovah has made his people independent of all translators that choose to obscure his name. Not only has he provided a translation that rightly puts his name in the Christian Greek Scriptures but also now he is having a translation made that sets forth his holy name in the Hebrew Scriptures.

¹⁹ In evidence of this I am overjoyed to release to this 91-nation assembly the New World Translation of the Octateuch, the first eight books of the Bible, translated directly from the original Hebrew text. This volume sets out in modern English nearly a third of the Hebrew-Aramaic Scriptures or the books from Genesis to Ruth, inclusive. To Jehovah God we give our heartfelt thanks through Jesus Christ for providing this much of his Word in present-day English through the New World Bible Translation Committee. We shall expect the rest later.

FEATURES

20, 21. (a) How was it that God was called by the name and how has his being called such been vindicated today? (b) What is his attitude toward his name, and so how would we bring down indignation upon ourselves?

²⁰ The New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures dignifies and honors the worthy name of the Most High God, who gave us his written Word to make himself known to us. What he is called is not what man has made up and called him; it is what he called himself when his prophet Moses asked who he should say had sent him to the sons of Israel enslaved in Egypt. (Ex. 3:13-16, AS) Now, in these “latter days” before the universal war of Armageddon, God has vindicated what he then called himself by now producing a name-people for himself just as he did in the days of the apostles.

²¹ He has restored this people for his name’s sake, as his prophecy for these latter days declared: “Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Now will I bring back the captivity of Jacob, and have mercy upon the whole house of Israel; and I will be jealous for my holy name. . . . And they shall know that I am Jehovah their God.” (Ezek. 39:25-28, AS; Da) The everliving God is jealous in this respect, as Exodus 34:14 (Fenton’s translation) further emphasizes, Jehovah there saying: “You shall not worship another god, for the EVERLIVING iS jealous of HIS NAME; He is a jealous God.” Or, as the New World Translation renders this Ex 34 verse 14: “For you must not bow down to another god, because Jehovah is exclusively devoted to his name. He is a God exacting exclusive devotion.” Since he is jealous of his name or exclusively devoted to it and will tolerate no rivalry by the name of another god among his people, then it would surely bring down upon us divine indignation if we gave prominence to the names of false gods and of notable men and women and at the same time scorned the name of the true God who is jealous for it, exclusively devoted to it.

22. How does the New World Translation render the Tetragrammaton in the Masoretic Hebrew text, and how does it handle the changes that were made by the Sopherim, and with what result?

²² We may, therefore, with safety to ourselves and to God’s pleasure, use this New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. With due respect for the Jealous God, the God exacting exclusive devotion, it renders every occurrence of the sacred Tetragrammaton in the Hebrew Octateuch by its acceptable English equivalent, Jehovah. This procedure guarantees the proper rendering of the rest of the 6,823 occurrences of the Tetragrammaton in the best Masoretic Hebrew text of the Bible. But not only that, the New World Translation takes note of the 134 cases where the ancient Hebrew Sopherim or Bible copyists changed the original Hebrew text from the Tetragrammaton or “Jehovah” to read Adonayʹ or “the Lord”, and also some other cases where they changed it to Elohimʹ or “God”. In the Hebrew Octateuch there are seventeen cases of this, and all these have been restored to their original reading “Jehovah”. As a result, when the New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures is finally completed in three volumes, by divine favor, it should contain considerably more occurrences of “Jehovah” than the current Hebrew Masoretic text has.—See Genesis 18:3, footnote⁠^a

23. For following whose example are we glad to have the New World Translation, and how do we show reverence for the sacred name?

²³ Thus we are most happy to have a Bible translation that did not copy the example of the Protestant translation that “returns to the procedure of the King James Version, which follows the precedent of the ancient Greek and Latin translators and the long-established practice in the reading of the Hebrew scriptures in the synagogue”. Thank God that, instead of following the long-established practice of the Jewish synagogue that rejected Jesus Christ and his twelve apostles and other disciples, the New World Bible Translation Committee follows the example of the Chief Vindicator of Jehovah God, his Son Jesus Christ, and thus comes out for the vindication of God’s name. We show reverence for that sacred name, not by superstitiously refusing to pronounce it and using a weak and confusing substitute; no, but by pronouncing and making known the name, never mentioning or taking it in a worthless way, but showing all the wonderful and glorious things that are associated with that name, all the things that have been said, written and done in that name, all the precious promises that have been made in that name and that are being fulfilled in our very day or will be fulfilled in the blessed future, thus magnifying that name and building up men’s respect for it and their faith in it.

24. How does Deuteronomy 10:17 show Jehovah worthy of distinction, and what special rendering by the New World Translation gives it to him?

²⁴ In our new version Deuteronomy 10:17 reads: “For Jehovah your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, mighty and fear-inspiring God.” Thus Jehovah is worthy of distinction, and our new version affords him distinction in a special rendering in numbers of places. At Genesis 1:1, the opening verse of the Bible, we read: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” There, as the Bible footnote shows, the Hebrew word for “God” is El·o·himʹ, and it is without the definite article ha meaning “the”. However, there are numerous places in the Hebrew text where El·o·himʹ is preceded by the definite article. In many places the New World Translation has seen it to be proper and effective to translate this definite article ha before El·o·himʹ into English.

25. What does the Bible footnote say on the first two cases of ha-El·o·himʹ, why could it have been rendered even more strongly, and what does it emphasize as fitting for God?

²⁵ The first cases of this are at Genesis 5:22-24 concerning the faithful prophet Enoch, which reads: “And after his producing Methuselah Enoch went on walking with the God three hundred years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters. So all the days of Enoch amounted to three hundred and sixty-five years. And Enoch kept walking with the God. Then he was no more, for God took him.” On the expression “the God” the Bible footnote says: “Here we have the first and second instances where the Hebrew term El·o·himʹ is preceded by the definite article ha. Use of the article here is deliberate, doubtless because of the move toward false worship indicated shortly before this at Genesis 4:26. Hence it is here emphasized that Enoch walked with the true God. So we feel justified in using the definite article ‘the’ here for emphasis and identification.” The New World Translation could have rendered the expression even stronger than the literal rendering “the God”, for the noted Hebrew grammarian Wilhelm Gesénius renders ha-El·o·himʹ by the words “the one true God”. At Deuteronomy 4:35 (NW) Moses says to the Israelites: “You—you have been shown so as to know that Jehovah is the God; there is no other besides him.” This expression “the God” emphasizes that Jehovah is to be distinguished from other gods; hence the fitness of his taking a name to himself.

26, 27. How does the trinitarian argument on the literal meaning of El·o·himʹ recoil against trinitarians, and how do the footnotes on Genesis 1:1 and Judges 16:23, 24 knock the ground from under them?

²⁶ One thing is sure: the religious clergy who believe in the pagan doctrine of a trinity will not like the New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. The trinitarian clergy point out that the title El·o·himʹ, as applied to the Creator, is in the plural number and literally means “Gods”. They claim that this is a proof of the teaching of a trinity in the Hebrew Scriptures, namely, that there are “three Persons” in one God. But their own argument recoils against them in disproof, for, as they themselves point out, El·o·himʹ means “Gods”, and not “Persons”. So, to follow through with their own argument, the title El·o·himʹ would teach that there are two or more Gods in one, instead of “three Persons in one God”. Thus the trinitarians would be guilty of arguing that there is a multiplicity of gods, contrary to their insistence that there are not three Gods, but only one God, except that this one God has three Persons in himself. Right at the start the footnote of the New World Translation at Genesis 1:1 knocks the ground from under the trinity champions by saying: “The form of the title El·o·himʹ is plural, the plural of excellence or majesty and not to denote a multiple personality. The Greek LXX [Septuagint] renders El·o·himʹ as ho The·osʹ, showing that it means an individual ‘God’. Compare Judges 16:23, 24, footnote⁠^a.”

²⁷ This latter footnote shows that El·o·himʹ does not mean a plurality of gods or persons, because at Judges 16:23, 24, el·o·himʹ is applied to the false god Dagon, just one false god, not many, and hence the title el·o·himʹ must be in the plural of excellence or majesty. Also, el·o·himʹ is followed by a singular verb, showing only one god is meant. In fact, when Micah 4:5 (AS) says, “All the peoples walk every one in the name of his god,” the Hebrew word translated “god” is this el·o·himʹ in the plural of excellence or majesty.

28. How is the New World Translation noteworthy regarding faith?

²⁸ Another noteworthy thing: The New World Translation magnifies faith in God. The apostle Paul, in Hebrews, chapter eleven, states that the faithful witnesses of Jehovah from the first martyr Abel onward distinguished themselves by their faith in God. In the King James Version, however, the word “faith” occurs only twice in its entire “Old Testament” (Deut. 32:20; Hab. 2:4), and only twice in the American Standard Version (Isa. 26:2; Hab. 2:4). But the New World Translation, in the Octateuch, or first eight books of the Bible, makes faith prominent before the reader by using the word seven appropriate times. For example, concerning Abraham, whom Paul calls the “father of all those having faith”, we read, at Genesis 15:6 (NW): “And he put faith in Jehovah, and he proceeded to count it to him as righteousness.” Concerning the Israelites at their passing through the Red Sea dryshod we read, at Exodus 14:31 (NW): “Israel also got to see the great hand that Jehovah put in action against the Egyptians, and the people began to fear Jehovah and to put faith in Jehovah and in Moses his servant.” Judging by the seven occurrences of “faith” in the Octateuch,b we may expect the word to have due place in the rest of the translation of the Hebrew Scriptures.

29, 30. How is a precise meaning given to the Hebrew word ‘o·lamʹ, and how is this shown to be appropriate with the types of the Jewish system of things?

²⁹ Another precise rendering is that of the Hebrew word ‘o·lamʹ, which the King James Version renders as “forever”, “perpetual,” “everlasting,” “ever,” “evermore,” “always,” “lasting,” “of old,” etc. The word really means “concealed time”, and so refers to time the limit of which is concealed, indefinite time in the past or in the future, which may, of course, be forever. So it is interesting to see the word at times rendered “to time indefinite”, especially in connection with the temporary, typical things of the ancient Jewish system of things.

³⁰ The apostle Paul says those things were mere shadows of better things to come, hence they were not everlasting or eternal but were temporary. However, the time when they were to end and give place to the realities was not known to man and hence was in the indefinite future. (Heb. 10:1; Col. 2:17) The weekly sabbath of the Jews passed away at the terminating of their Law covenant with God on the day of Pentecost A.D. 33, when the holy spirit was poured out and Christ’s disciples entered into God’s great sabbath by faith in Christ’s ransom sacrifice. How appropriate, then, the New World Translation’s rendering of Exodus 31:16, 17: “And the sons of Israel must keep the sabbath, so as to carry out the sabbath during their generations. It is a covenant to time indefinite. Between me and the sons of Israel it is a sign to time indefinite, because in six days Jehovah made the heavens and the earth and on the seventh day he rested and proceeded to refresh himself”! How appropriate, too, the rendering of Exodus 40:15 concerning the priesthood of Aaron’s family which was to pass away and be superseded by that of Christ: “So they must act as priests to me, and their anointing must serve continually for them as a priesthood to time indefinite during their generations”!

31. How does the New World Translation treat the Hebrew word Sh^eolʹ?

³¹ The New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures promises to put the teachers of eternal torment of the human soul after death into great difficulty. The Hebrew word Sh^eolʹ, which the Catholic Douay Version translates mainly as “hell” and which the King James Version translates “grave” and “pit” as well as “hell”, occurs seven times in the Octateuch. Each time, however, the New World Translation transliterates the Hebrew word into English and renders it uniformly as “Sheʹol”. For example, in the first occurrence of the word, at Genesis 37:35, the words of Jacob, bereaved of his beloved son Joseph, are translated as saying: “I shall go down mourning to my son into Sheʹol!” An article in the Appendix gives valuable information regarding the Hebrew word Sh^eolʹ and says: “It is in the earth and is always associated with the dead, and plainly means the common grave of all mankind, or gravedom, or the earthly (not sea) region of the dead; in contrast with the Hebrew word qebʹer, which means an individual grave or burial place. (Genesis 23:4, 6, 9, 20)” This information and this rendering of the Hebrew word will be of much comfort to those who have cruelly been taught that hell is a place of fiendish torment for human souls after death, to the reproach of Jehovah God, who is love.—1 John 4:8, 16; John 3:16.

32. How have modern translators left their readers ignorant as to the real meaning of the soul, for instance, at Genesis 2:7?

³² We know, too, from what the Hebrew Scriptures as well as the Christian Greek Scriptures teach regarding the soul, that eternal torture of human souls after death is an impossibility and a foul defamation of God’s name. Certainly the human soul could not be tormented forever in an invisible world if the human soul is not immortal, but is destructible, mortal. Modern translators confuse their readers and leave them ignorant as to what a soul is, thus leaving them exposed to the pagan doctrines on the soul and to the perils of spiritism. The Hebrew word translated “soul” by all the translators is nephʹesh. God’s Word teaches that man is a nephʹesh, a soul, and does not have a soul breathed into his body as a thing separate and distinct. But how are Bible readers to know that fact when the 1952 Catholic Confraternity translation of the Bible’s first eight books renders Genesis 2:7: “Then the LORD God formed man out of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living being”? The 1952 Revised Standard Version likewise reads: “and man became a living being.” The Hebrew word there rendered “being” is nephʹesh; and the inspired apostle Paul, when quoting Genesis 2:7, writes: “The first man, Adam, became a living soul.”—1 Cor. 15:45, Cath. Confrat.

33. How do modern translators hide the fact that lower animals are souls and that the human soul dies?

³³ God’s Word teaches that animals lower than man are souls; but how would Bible readers ever know it when the Revised Standard Version renders Genesis 1:20, 21, 24: “And God said, ‘Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, . . . ’ So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, . . . And God said, ‘Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds’”? The Hebrew word there rendered “creature” is nephʹesh, the same word as applied to the first man. When a lower animal dies, a soul or creature dies. So, too, when man dies a human soul dies and ceases to be. But how would Bible readers learn that fact when the Revised Standard Version makes the prophet Balaam say, at Numbers 23:10: “Let me die the death of the righteous, and let my end be like his!” and makes Samson say, at Judges 16:30: “Let me die with the Philistines”? In each case the pronoun “me” is used to translate the Hebrew expression naph·shiʹ, which literally means “my soul”.

34. Why must we let God’s Word talk in its own language about the soul?

³⁴ Thus when a Bible student with his mind already filled with popular pagan theories on the human soul reads such modern Bible versions, he receives no correction of his understanding of this vital subject. The false teaching about the soul is left standing and the Bible versions provide no adequate means for him to refute the pagan falsehoods. Jehovah God, the Creator of the human soul, knows more about it than Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, “Saint” Augustine, or any modern religious clergyman or spiritist ever did. So to learn the truth about the soul we have to let God’s Word talk in its own inspired language. That way a Bible translator does not hide the complete, satisfying solution to the so-called mystery about the soul, and the reader will be enabled to grasp the most scientific teaching there is on this doctrine that affects his proper understanding of other vital Bible teachings, such as immortality, punishment for sin, man’s destiny, the ransom sacrifice, the resurrection, the destiny of Satan the Devil, etc.

35. What did the New World Bible Translation Committee succeed in doing regarding nephʹesh, and how is this shown to be nothing primitive?

³⁵ Here, then, is where a special feature of the New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures figures in. In its Volume I, containing the Octateuch, or first eight books of the Bible, the translation committee succeeded in understandably translating every one of the 231 occurrences of the Hebrew word nephʹesh as “soul”. Each such rendering of nephʹesh makes good English and good sense even in this twentieth century. The way the first eight books of the Bible describe the soul is not something crude, something primitive that was dropped later on and revised when the pagan Grecian philosophy was developed and came in contact with the Hebrews. Instead, it is something fundamental, stable and unchangeably correct, and is in complete harmony with the teachings of Jesus and his disciples who wrote the Christian Greek Scriptures. This can be demonstrated by comparing the Appendix of the Octateuch on “soul” with that of the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures released at this same Yankee Stadium during the International Assembly of Jehovah’s witnesses in 1950.

36. What facts about the soul does the New World Translation Appendix list scriptures to show?

³⁶ For the Octateuch alone the Appendix lists 14 Scripture instances to show that lower animals are souls according to the Bible; 57 instances to show that a living person or individual is a soul and does not have a separable Platonic soul inside him; 49 instances to show that the creature soul is mortal, destructible; 12 instances to show that a corpse or carcass is a “dead soul”; 50 instances to show that one’s life as an intelligent creature or animal is called “soul” and thus the soul is said to be in the blood, because our life is dependent upon that fluid in our blood vessels; and 48 instances where a person speaks of himself or is spoken to or spoken about as a soul. There are also three cases in the Octateuch where God speaks of himself this way, as if he had soul.

37. How is this consistent rendering of the Hebrew word nephʹesh of invaluable service?

³⁷ This consistent rendering of the Hebrew word nephʹesh does not become archaic, clumsy or unintelligible in any Bible verse, but it becomes invaluable in restoring correct Bible speech about the soul and explodes man-made, Devil-inspired philosophy about it. On this score Christendom’s clergy need badly to get away from paganism and back to the Bible; and psychologists, psychoanalysts and psychiatrists could learn solid principles about the soul in the Bible and know how the “soul” should be effectively treated.

KNOWN TO BE CALLED BY THAT NAME

38. Where do we look for a properly authorized version of the Bible, and why?

³⁸ Much more could be said about the special features of the New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, but enough has already been said to reveal in what way other translations have come short and why searchers for life-giving Bible truth need the New World Translation. The religious clergy of Christendom and of Jewry in general will not approve of this Bible version, but we do not look to them to pronounce this an “authorized version”. Who is it that gives the real authorization to any Bible version? Religious denominations and religious heads and potentates can only authorize Bible versions for use in their respective churches or synagogues; and religious clergymen may be expected to forbid their congregations to read or use the New World Translation or will recommend to them to avoid it. But we do not look for a Bible version authorized by religionists of this world. We look for one authorized by the Bible’s Creator, Jehovah God. He used men who were his witnesses to write the Bible; and he authorizes men who are now his witnesses and who belong to the ‘people taken out of the nations for his name’ to provide us a translation that upholds the honor of his name. (Acts 15:14) It is upon such people for his name that he pours out his holy spirit, and it is to this name-people that his commandment applies to preach “this good news of the kingdom” in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations. This pair of facts constitutes a higher and more valid authorization to produce a modern-language version of his Holy Word than any religious sect, potentate or hierarchy can confer.

39. To correspond with the first century, in what kind of language is the New World Translation published today, and what are our hopes for it respecting Armageddon?

³⁹ Jehovah’s New World society will be very glad to use this New World Translation of the Scriptures and gratefully accept it from him and lovingly thank him for it. After reading it they will be impelled to recommend it to the people. In the days of the apostles the Christian Greek Scriptures were written by the inspired disciples in the international language of the first century, the koiʹne or common Greek. Today the New World Translation is first published in the universal or international language of the twentieth century, English. We trust that this Bible translation will survive the coming war of Armageddon with other good Bible translations in English, besides all useful ones in other languages used by the New World society, for at least the temporary use of the Armageddon survivors of various languages.

40. What is it reasonable to await under God’s kingdom as to a Bible translation, and why?

⁴⁰ It is reasonable, though, to await under God’s kingdom a uniform translation of all the Holy Scriptures, based on the most authentic manuscripts, in the one universal language that will be created by God and taught to all earth’s inhabitants. Thus all may get the proper rendering of the Scriptures in that one language to convey the exact sense of God’s miraculous Book produced in vindication of his word, which endures forever. Certainly all the living will want for once to have a perfect Bible and understand every word of it. Certainly, too, all those of mankind in general who will be resurrected from the memorial tombs will be quite uninformed about much or all of the Bible and will want to learn what the Bible teaches and what God said in it and how accurately he said it. The Bible should not become a “dead book” at any future time. Forever it will be a testimony to his praise, a memorial of his, an imperishable document for all those of humankind who gain eternal life in the righteous new world.

41. What did Jehovah say at Deuteronomy 28:9, 10 to his covenant people, and concerning whom was this to be true today?

⁴¹ Jehovah’s name-people who centuries ago were in a covenant with him under the law of Moses were typical. They prophetically pictured those today whom God has taken out of all nations to be a “people for his name”, the spiritual Israelites. To his ancient people he said by the lips of Moses: “Jehovah will establish you as a holy people to himself, just as he swore to you, because you continue to keep the commandments of Jehovah your God and you have walked in his ways. And all the peoples of the earth will have to see that Jehovah’s name has been called upon you and they will indeed be afraid of you.” (Deut. 28:9, 10, NW) This foreshadows a fact that is to be true of the spiritual Israelites who today are in the new covenant with God through the Mediator Jesus Christ. The natural Israelites having rejected God’s name nineteen centuries ago, these spiritual Israelites have become his name-people.

42. By their course of action what are various peoples proclaiming today, but what did God’s Word foretell regarding a remnant?

⁴² Now we are in the crucial “latter days” of this world. The time of the judgment of the nations is here when all peoples must seal their destiny by deciding in the name of which god to walk or to order their lives. By their course of action the various peoples are eloquently proclaiming the god in whose name they have decided to walk. Their chosen gods will fail them in the fiery day when true godship will be put to the test and the false gods will prove impotent to help the people and will perish. But Jehovah in his prophetic Word foretold the restoration of the remnant of his name-people to his favor in the latter days and said: “And they shall walk up and down in his name, saith Jehovah.”—Zech. 10:12, AS.

43. What has been the decision of the remnant, and with what effect upon all the peoples of the earth, and why?

⁴³ Exactly so, his name-people of today have made their decision, a choice different from that of the peoples of the world, and they have taken up the words of Micah 4:5 (AS) and say: “We will walk in the name of Jehovah our God for ever and ever.” They are striving to prove themselves his people indeed by keeping his commandments and walking in his ways and heralding abroad his kingdom of the new world. As a result all the peoples of the earth, even the enemies, have come to see that Jehovah’s name has been called upon them and they are afraid of them. No, not afraid of them because of being so mighty in number, for they are comparatively few and they are not politically popular or commercially wealthy or militarily strong with any carnal weapons of bloodshed; but because of the invincible message that they have drawn from God’s Holy Word and because of the omnipotent power that has manifestly displayed itself from heaven in their behalf.

44. What do those who develop a wise fear do, and what does walking now and always in Jehovah’s name mean for those doing so?

⁴⁴ Those of the nations who develop a wise fear learn to fear the God by whose name his people are called. They associate themselves with his witnesses and become part of the New World society that is now forming, and they too make the decision to walk in the name of Jehovah as their God forever and ever. And, indeed, in that name they will walk everlastingly, for their God will cover them in the shadow of his hand and bring them through into his new world without end. Walking now and always in the name of Jehovah our God means life forevermore through Jesus Christ our Lord.

[Footnotes]

The French translation now being made under the direction of l’École Biblique de Jérusalem uses the form Yahvé. (1948- )

The French translation by A. Crampon uses Yahweh. (1939)

The French translation by Cardinal Lienart uses Yahweh. (1951)

The French translation by Edouard Dhorme (le Père Paul Dhorme des Frères Précheurs) uses Iahve. (1910-1946)

The French translation by the monks of Maredsous uses Yahweh. (1949)

The Spanish translation by Bover-Cantera uses Yahveh. (1947)

The Spanish translation by Nacar-Colunga uses Yave. (1944)

The English Westminster Version of the Sacred Scriptures by C. Lattey, S.J., uses Jehovah. (1934- )

The Holy Bible translated by Monsignor Ronald A. Knox (1949) uses Javé many times, as at Exodus 33:19; Psalms 67:5, 21; 73:18; 82:19; Isaiah 42:8; 45:5, 6; etc.

Questions From Readers

● Matthew 5:22 states: “Whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.” What are the three dangers of which offenders are here warned?—T. C., Pennsylvania.

The New World Translation shows that “judgment” and “council” refer to courts and “hell fire” refers to the Valley of Hinnom, or Gehenna: “Everyone who continues angry with his brother will be accountable to the court of justice; but whoever addresses his brother with an unspeakable word of contempt will be accountable to the Supreme Court; whereas whoever says, ‘You despicable fool!’ will be liable to the fiery Gehenna.” The offenses increase in seriousness in the order named, and logically the ones to whom the offenders are accountable or the treatment to which they are liable increase proportionately in authority or severity.

The court of justice seems to be the same as the local courts spoken of at Matthew 10:17 and Mark 13:9, and the footnote in the New World Translation on “local courts” in these texts identifies them as “Lesser Sánhedrins”. Sánhedrin means an assembly or council. The Mosaic Law made provision for local courts where qualified men heard cases at the gates of the cities. Deuteronomy 16:18 (AS) ordered: “Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates, which Jehovah thy God giveth thee, according to thy tribes; and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment.” These local courts had jurisdiction even in murder cases and could pass the death sentence. They were re-established by Ezra after the return from Babylonian captivity, and it appears that Levites were extensively used in filling the positions of service in these courts.—Deut. 19:12; 21:1, 2; 1 Chron. 23:4; 26:29; Ezra 7:25, 26.

During the time of Jesus and the apostles these local courts or Lesser Sanhedrins operated, but under definite restrictions due to Roman rule over Palestine. According to the Rabbins, these lower courts consisted of 23 judges in towns where there were 120 representative men for various court uses and services, but in small towns where that number was not available only 3 judges were used. Jerusalem was said to have two courts of 23 judges each, plus 390 courts of 3 judges each to hear minor charges. The figures given by Josephus vary, for he states these local courts were made up of 7 judges, each of whom had assigned to him 2 officers who were Levites. Matters too hard for these local courts to decide went to the Great Sanhedrin in Jerusalem.—Josephus’ Antiquities, Book 4, chap. 8, sec. 14.

It is the Great Sanhedrin referred to in Matthew 5:22 as the “council” or “Supreme Court”, as shown by the footnote of the New World Translation. It was generally designated merely as the Sanhedrin. It is usually understood that when the Bible links chief priests and scribes and elders it is referring to the Sanhedrin, as at Matthew 16:21 (NW): “From that time forward Jesus Christ commenced showing his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the older men of influence and chief priests and scribes and be killed and on the third day be raised up.” The claim is made that the 71 members of the Sanhedrin were made up as follows: 24 were chief priests, 24 were elders or older men of influence, 22 were scribes or lawyers, and the high priest completed the number 71. A president and vice-president were elected. This Jewish supreme court heard only cases the lower courts could not decide and referred to it, and cases involving the highest offenses that were brought to it directly. This was specially true of cases involving blasphemy or apostasy.—Matt. 26:57, 59-68; John 19:7; Acts 5:27-29; 6:11-15; 7:1, 54-60, NW.

The Jews like to believe that the Sanhedrin started with Moses and the 70 that he chose to help him judge matters for Israel in the wilderness. (Num. 11:16, 17) Some have even suggested that Jesus replaced this Jewish body when he sent out 70 disciples to preach, since Jesus as their head would make 71. (Luke 10:1) However, the facts indicate that the Sanhedrin originated during Greek rule over Judea. During Roman rule it passed judgment on matters of life and death, but it could not execute its sentences of death but had to submit its action for review by the Roman authorities.—John 18:28-40; 19:1-16, NW.

Lastly, Matthew 5:22 speaks of those liable to “hell fire” or “Gehenna”. To use “hell fire” gives a false idea, for in the original Greek it reads gehenna of fire; gehenna is the Greek for the Hebrew geʹi-Hinnom, meaning “valley of Hinnom”. This valley lay to the west and south of ancient Jerusalem. During the time of the later kings of Judah it was used in the idolatrous worship of Molech, human sacrifices being offered to this god by fire. (Josh. 15:8; 2 Chron. 28:3; 33:6; Jer. 7:31, 32; 32:35) To prevent its use again for such horrible religious purposes faithful King Josiah had it polluted and it came to be the dumping place and incinerator for the refuse of Jerusalem. (2 Ki. 23:10) The dead bodies of animals were thrown in, to be consumed by the fires kept burning there and to which sulphur or brimstone was added to assist the burning. Even bodies of executed criminals thought too vile to have a resurrection were disposed of there. If the bodies did not reach the fires but lodged on a ledge of the deep ravine worms consumed them. The final paragraph of the New World Translation’s appendix material on this valley reads, on page 767:

“No living animals or human creatures were pitched into Gehenna to be burned alive or tormented. Hence the place could never symbolize an invisible region where human souls are tormented in literal fire and attacked by undying immortal worms for ever and ever. (Isa. 66:24) Because the dead criminals cast here were denied a decent burial in a memorial tomb, which symbolizes the hope of a resurrection, Gehenna was used by Jesus and his disciples to symbolize everlasting destruction, annihilation from God’s universe, or ‘second death’, an eternal punishment. Hence to be sentenced to have one’s dead body cast into Gehenna was considered the worst kind of punishment. From the literal Gehenna and from its significance the symbol of the ‘lake burning with fire and sulphur’ was drawn, at Revelation 19:20; 20:10, 14, 15; 21:8.”

In the preceding verse (Matt. 5:21) Jesus called attention to the well-known fact that whoever committed a murder would be accountable to the court of justice, and then to this common understanding he added the words of Mt 5 verse 22 to show how much more exacting were the new precepts he was pronouncing. One might become angry for a reason, but to continue in that provoked state would allow an opening for the Devil and might result in our sinning. (Eph. 4:26, 27, NW) So continued anger toward a brother would put one in need of correction, as symbolized by the court of justice. For that anger to manifest itself in “an unspeakable word of contempt” would be even more serious and call for stronger correction or punishment, as symbolized by the higher court or Jewish Supreme Court, the Sanhedrin. But to start judging a brother as a “despicable fool”, which might Scripturally imply he blasphemes and denies Jehovah God (Ps. 14:1), is extremely serious and could make one liable to eternal destruction, or, in other words, “to the fiery Gehenna.” So Jesus used things familiar to the Jews—the court of justice and the Supreme Court and fiery Gehenna—to convey to them the increasing weight and severity of the punishments that would come for sins of increasing seriousness.

● Is it Scriptural to assume that the 144,000 body-members of Christ are used to fill up the places vacated by the angels that rebelled and became demons and were ousted from heaven by Christ, thereby keeping intact the numerical strength of the heavenly realm?—J. D., India.

There is no direct scripture to show that the 144,000 members of Christ’s body or congregation are used to replace a like number of angels who turned unfaithful, followed Satan and became demons and who will be destroyed. Certainly none of those unfaithful angels were on a spiritual level equal to that to which the 144,000 are glorified; so that even with the bringing of the 144,000 to the heavens there would still be 144,000 places on the level formerly occupied by those demons left vacant, if the number was the same. Moreover, who replaces Satan? Not Christ, for he was already a member of the heavenly organization before he came to earth, a member of it before the covering cherub that became Satan even existed. (Rev. 3:14) Jesus could never be viewed as taking the place in heaven formerly held by Satan, for Jesus is glorified to a station higher than he occupied originally, and that original one was above that held by the deflecting cherub. (Phil. 2:9-11) Since there is no one to fill the place Satan once held, it does not seem Scriptural to argue that the 144,000 are used to fill up the number in heaven left vacant by the ousted demons. The number of spirit creatures in heaven is not fixed, and Jehovah God can always create more.

Announcements

HELPING PRISONERS TO SECURE FREEDOM

A full measure of freedom from sickness, sorrow, corruption, false religion, sin and death is unknown in human history since the rebellion in Eden. But Jehovah God has provided a great Liberator, Christ Jesus, who opens the way for men to gain true freedom in a new world, now close at hand. “The creation itself also will be set free from enslavement to corruption and have the glorious freedom of the children of God.” (Rom. 8:21, NW) Right now persons of good will everywhere are moving steadily toward that complete freedom. How? By acquainting themselves with the free Word of God, which is the truth that breaks the shackles of false ideas, superstitions and teachings binding them. During September Jehovah’s witnesses will help human prisoners move toward the glorious field of freedom by presenting at each home the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures and a bound book, on a contribution of only $2.

OBTAIN CONVENTION RELEASES

The New World Society Assembly at Yankee Stadium brought forth many new and helpful publications. Above all, you will want to obtain the following three. (1) New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, 864 pages, includes Genesis to Ruth. It is complete with appendix, drawings and maps. Green leatherette binding, only $1.50 a copy. (2) “New Heavens and a New Earth”, 384 pages. A Bible study aid containing 22 chapters; illustrated; has a chart of outstanding historical dates; subject and scripture indexes. Gold embossed, dark-blue binding, only 50 cents a copy. (3) “Make Sure of All Things”, 416 pages. This is a Bible handbook that deals with 70 major topics. Each is first defined and its origin shown. Then, under subheadings dealing with various aspects of that topic, Scripture texts are quoted without comment that show what the Bible teaches regarding the subject. Brown cloth binding, only 75 cents a copy. All three publications may be had for only $2.75. Write today.

“WATCHTOWER” STUDIES

Week of October 4: “Walk in the Name of Jehovah Our God for Ever,” ¶1-19.

Week of October 11: “Walk in the Name of Jehovah Our God for Ever,” ¶20-44.

Check Your Memory

After reading this issue of “The Watchtower”, do you remember—

✔ Why it is that many theological students enter seminaries “hot” and come out “cold”? P. 516, ¶6.

✔ How it was possible for Jesus to become a man and still retain his prehuman identity? P. 517, ¶4.

✔ Why Jesus’ fleshly body could not go to heaven? P. 520, ¶1.

✔ What minor sect of the Jews seems to have written the Dead Sea Scroll of Isaiah? P. 521, ¶3.

✔ Why some have called the Essenes the forerunners of Communism? P. 522, ¶2.

✔ The condition a district officer prescribed before Jehovah’s witnesses could be run out of a Nigerian town? P. 525, ¶4.

✔ What word the “Episcopal Churchnews” said best described the feeling running through “The Watchtower”? P. 526, ¶5.

✔ Why it is necessary for the Christian God to be distinguished by a name? P. 530, ¶8.

✔ How Jehovah has made his people independent of all translators that choose to obscure his name? P. 534, ¶19.

✔ What expression emphasizes that Jehovah is to be distinguished from other gods? P. 536, ¶25.

✔ Why teachers of the trinity doctrine will not like the “New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures”? P. 536, ¶26.

✔ Why teachers of eternal torment will not like the “New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures”? P. 537, ¶31.

✔ What constitutes a higher authorization to produce a translation of the Bible than any religious sect can confer? P. 540, ¶38.

✔ What is really behind the expression “hell fire”? P. 542, ¶7.