The Watchtower — January 15, 1954

The Folly of Apathy

THIS is the day of indifference, unconcern and apathy. Talk to a person about the dry rot of corruption in high places, and he manifests indifference. Tell him about the staggering and ever-mounting national debt that is undermining the nation’s economic stability, and he remains unconcerned. Warn him of the creeping fascism that is gnawing at the very vitals of his most precious freedoms, and he shows apathy. And knock at his door with a message from God’s Word, and he may not even exert himself to ascertain whether the one calling is peddling shoe strings or is a Christian minister bringing the good news of God’s kingdom.

And modern man feels quite pleased with his apathy. Why be concerned with corruption, with a day of reckoning or with what the morrow may bring? Things are going well with me today! Like his counterpart of twenty-five centuries ago he says: “Jehovah seeth us not; Jehovah hath forsaken the land.” “Jehovah will not do good, neither will he do evil.” (Ezek. 8:12; Zeph. 1:12, AS) Or he may take the smug attitude that “the old-time religion is good enough for me,” never concerning himself with whether his forebears used good judgment in picking their religion or not.

Actually his actions show him to be the fool that “hath said in his heart, There is no God.” (Ps. 14:1) Deep down in that heart he is dissatisfied with his philosophy of life, but instead of looking for something better, he selfishly indulges himself in physical pleasures and sooner or later is made to know the truth that “whatever a man is sowing, this he will also reap.”—Gal. 6:7, NW.

Instead of manifesting apathy, now more than ever before is the time for us to be alert, watchful, interested and concerned, for there is a God in heaven and his Word is truth. And that Word shows that we are living in a transition period from an old system of things to a new heavens and earth. (2 Pet. 3:4, 13) Now, therefore, is the time to heed Jesus’ warning: “Pay attention to yourselves that your hearts never become weighed down with overeating and heavy drinking,” and to obey the command: “Seek ye Jehovah, . . . seek righteousness, seek meekness.”—Luke 21:34; Zeph. 2:3, AS.

Those who make the hope of God’s kingdom their concern will receive even now peace of mind and joy of heart. And that hope is truly a prize for which to live, work and fight, for it will take an everlasting life to realize fully its blessings of peace and prosperity, health and life. Those manifesting apathy toward that hope today will never know such blessings. Truly such apathy is folly.

Do You Respect Plagiarists?

A New York preacher and a Texas editor repeatedly take articles from “The Watchtower” and “Awake!” and publish them as their own in their religious paper

WHAT do you think of a man that lifts articles from one magazine and has them published in another magazine? What do you think when he attaches his name as author of the stolen articles? What do you think of him when he continues to do it after he has been caught and has promised to quit? And does the fact that he claims to be a minister of religion shock you still more?

Again, what do you think of the magazine that uses the plagiarized articles? What do you think of the judgment of such a magazine when it denounces as false another magazine, then turns around and prints as truth the articles plagiarized from it? What do you think of the editor that tells the injured magazine its word is worthless when it brings the plagiarism to his notice? What do you think of him when he ignores the proof sent to him? What do you think when his magazine continues to use the stolen articles? And does not the fact that this magazine poses as Christian make the plagiarism even more reprehensible?

Can you have confidence in such a writer? or in the magazine that uses his plagiarized copy? or in the editor that directs it? Consider the facts, then form your opinion.

The “writer” is Antonio Ochoa of New York city and is a minister of the Churches of Christ. The magazines from which he copies his articles are The Watchtower and the Awake! published by the Watchtower Society, who are publishers for Jehovah’s witnesses. The magazine that uses the plagiarized articles is the Churches of Christ paper Gospel Broadcast, published in Dallas, Texas. The editor and publisher of it is Eugene S. Smith.

The Watchtower Society learned of this unethical practice when a member of the Churches of Christ presented one of Jehovah’s witnesses with a copy of the Gospel Broadcast. “We were somewhat shocked,” wrote the witness, “to find that this magazine, namely the Gospel Broadcast, is copying the articles from The Watchtower and is printing them as though their minister was the originator of them.” Churches of Christ members were very much more shocked when Jehovah’s witnesses at their doors would tell them that parts of their Gospel Broadcast were only reprints of parts of The Watchtower and Awake! How odd, since their religious leaders tell them these magazines are false, for their paper to use articles from these magazines and credit one of their ministers as the author!

A HASTY REPLY

When we wrote Editor Smith asking if it was his policy to republish articles without giving credit to the original publications he snapped back: “Since you give no specific information concerning the date of issue or title of article, I have only your word as given in your letter—and if this is no better than others I have received from your organization in the past, it means absolutely nothing.” Would not a reliable editor have investigated such a serious charge before answering? Above all, should not an editor claiming to be Christian be guided by the Bible principle, “He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him”? Hasty replies that question the veracity of others are not characteristic of men possessing understanding: “He that is slow to wrath is of great understanding: but he that is hasty of spirit exalteth folly.”—Prov. 18:13; 14:29.

Smith’s quick retort may have sprung from the high esteem in which he holds Ochoa, for the man in charge of the Gospel Broadcast’s publishing plant is reported to have lauded Ochoa as a great scholar, not knowing apparently that the scholarly articles had been lifted from the publications of Jehovah’s witnesses. But whatever Smith’s reasons for his slurring reply to our letter about the plagiarized material, we responded to it by sending marked copies of nine different issues of The Watchtower and one of Awake! that had been plagiarized in fourteen issues of the Gospel Broadcast in just nine months; and a number of other examples could have been cited.a Our letter accompanying the proof of plagiarism stated:

“In your letter of May 23 [1953] to us you said you had only our word on this matter and concluded that our word meant absolutely nothing. The foregoing gives you proof that it does mean something. Now we would like to know if you have any apology or reconsideration to make concerning this discourteous dismissal of our first letter bringing this matter to your attention. Do you think your appropriating of another organization’s labor and writing without giving credit is ethical or Christian? While you may not have known your contributor was lifting the articles from The Watchtower, yet you must know that publishers cannot shift responsibility in such matters to contributors. The publisher bears responsibility for what he prints.”

This registered letter requested the courtesy of an answer. None was received. It seems that this editor that called our word worthless was knocked speechless when he realized he had thrown a verbal boomerang. It must have been a sickening sensation when he checked and saw paragraph after paragraph in Ochoa’s articles that were lifted bodily from earlier issues of The Watchtower and Awake!

A BROKEN PROMISE

What did the Churches of Christ minister, Antonio Ochoa, have to say when confronted with his plagiarist activities? Writing on May 18, 1953, he said: “In respect to your letter of May 16, I have to admit that it is true that I have quoted certain articles from your magazine and I haven’t said the origin of such research, because of the strong prejudice among the people who read those articles, against Jehovah’s witnesses. I thank you very much for your letter and the advice you give me, and I promised that never I will do that any more as that is your will. Although I have to tell you that I never have received money for the things I write, my only purpose is to do something good and open the eyes of the people who don’t have perhaps the opportunity to see the truth more perfectly because of the prejudices and the environment where they live.”

What Ochoa is saying is that the people of his own religious faith are so prejudiced that they would not consider Bible truth if they knew it came from Jehovah’s witnesses. Because of these prejudices he says they “don’t have perhaps the opportunity to see the truth more perfectly.” This is an admission that their own church does not provide them with clear truth and that to “open the eyes of the people” he brings into their view the clear truth presented in The Watchtower and Awake! But “because of the strong prejudice” against Jehovah’s witnesses, he says he must let them think the needed truth is from his pen to get them to take it in. Apparently he puts Editor Smith in the same prejudiced class in need of truth, and gets him to accept it for publication by concealing its real source.

But what of Ochoa’s promise to steal no more? Instead of falsely branding our word worthless Smith could truly say of Ochoa’s word, “It means absolutely nothing.” Four months after Ochoa’s promise to quit plagiarism the Gospel Broadcast of September 17 published almost in its entirety an article from the February 8, 1953, Awake! and their issue of September 24 carried an article copied paragraph for paragraph from the June 8 Awake! But Ochoa still feels that the Gospel Broadcast readers are too prejudiced to take truth straight from the original source; so he took full credit. The October 8 Gospel Broadcast again carried reprints from The Watchtower with typist Ochoa posing as the author. As he had frequently done before, he even used our title, “The Greater Happiness of Giving,” in copying from our August 1 issue. Mixed in with our material, which highlighted the happiness of giving spiritual food, was Ochoa’s thanks for money sent to him. He enjoys receiving money, but spiritually gives only what he has taken from others. Perhaps the spiritual pantry of his own church is bare. Editor Smith must think it is, else why knowingly continue an accomplice to literary piracy?

As this is being finally written, the latest plagiarism is in the November 19 Gospel Broadcast. It has word for word the four-page article of the February 1, 1953, Watchtower entitled “Transmitting God’s Word.” That is, word for word except where Ochoa failed to copy carefully and left out three lines, resulting in sentences that made no sense. Ochoa did not catch his copyist errors, nor did Smith, nor did proofreaders. Similar carelessness occurred in the February 5, 1953, Gospel Broadcast, which took an article from The Watchtower but made some cuts to fit the available space. This article was documented, with reference numbers in the article and at the end these numbers and the sources of proof were listed. When they cut the article some reference numbers were cut, but at the end of the article these omitted numbers appeared with their sources, just as in The Watchtower’s complete article. They are very careless plagiarists, as well as unprincipled.

“BY YOUR WORDS YOU WILL BE CONDEMNED”

Jesus said: “By your words you will be vindicated, and by your words you will be condemned.” (Matt. 12:37, NW) So hear their words. In the Gospel Broadcast of last May 14 their writer James Lovell said: “The world does not take our word or recognize our goodness above that of any other religious body and HAS NO VALID REASON TO DO SO. It is high time those of us who call ourselves Christians returned to God.” We agree, and suggest as a beginning the ending of plagiarizing and the questioning of our word when they do not think very highly of their own. “First extract the rafter from your own eye, and then you will see clearly how to extract the straw from your brother’s eye.” (Matt. 7:5, NW) In the November 25, 1948, Gospel Broadcast Lovell noted the growth of Jehovah’s witnesses despite persecution and said: “Our love for and faith in Christ are not enough to bring any sort of persecution in any nation.” After mentioning the tremendous circulation of Jehovah’s witnesses’ literature, he said: “Much of the stuff we print is trash which our own members will not buy or read, much less being able to sell it to others.” Saying Watch Tower publishing was done “by members who work for $10 a month ‘expense money,’” he contrasted: “We have a few loyal, consecrated servants who give themselves to the Cause for $50 a sermon ‘expense money,’ but, like a Catholic, there is an extra ‘expectation’ for preaching a funeral or performing a wedding!”

In the May 28 Gospel Broadcast of last year Lovell lamented the twenty or more divisions of the Churches of Christ in America, saying: “Every faction among us is headed up by an editor who either seeks personal power or who sells books. . . . Our attitude as much as says forget what Christ taught or wants as long as we can build a business or father a faction.” No soldier of Christ needlessly “involves himself in the commercial businesses of life.” Paul warns: “Keep your eye on those who create divisions.” Also, “Does the Christ exist divided?” A church “divided against itself will not stand.” A divided church may assume the name of Christ’s church, but it is what they do more than what they say that counts: “Not everyone saying to me, ‘Master, Master,’ will enter into the kingdom of the heavens, but the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will.” (2 Tim. 2:4; Rom. 16:17; 1 Cor. 1:13; Matt. 12:25; 7:21, NW) And it is not Jehovah God’s will for Christians to shun persecution, or print trash, or charge $50 for sermons, or build a business, or father a faction!

“THAT STEAL MY WORDS”

Nor is it Jehovah’s will for Christians to be plagiarists. False prophets in Israel would mingle with their lies the true words of Jehovah delivered by faithful prophets. Jehovah’s judgment was: “Behold, I am against the prophets, saith Jehovah, that steal my words every one from his neighbor.” The unscrupulous falsifiers mixed in true expressions to give their religious lies a deceptive ring of truth.—Jer. 23:30, AS.

Again, in ancient Israel dishonest merchants would add water to the wine to make it go farther, and Jehovah used this to illustrate moral and spiritual corruption, saying: “Thy silver is become dross, thy wine mixed with water.” (Isa. 1:22) Tasty wine that gives joy of heart should not be adulterated with water; nor should God’s Word be adulterated by mixing in false creeds or modern philosophies. Yet this is done, to make the Bible acceptable to a wider class of persons, to spread its watered-down message farther and bring in greater financial returns. Paul condemned this, saying: “We are not peddlers of the word of God.” He used the word “peddlers” to indicate dishonest merchants, such as those alluded to at Isaiah 1:22. His expression can also be rendered: “We are not those who commercialize or make gain of the word of God,” or, “We are not adulterators of the word of God.” A little later in his writings he said: “We do not behave improperly, but we have renounced the underhanded things of which to be ashamed, not walking in craftiness neither adulterating the word of God, but by making the truth manifest recommending ourselves to every human conscience in the sight of God.”—2 Cor. 2:17, NW, margin; 2 Co 4:1, 2, NW.

We cannot comprehend how one who claims to be a Christian minister can deliberately and regularly plagiarize and yet have a clear “conscience in the sight of God.” Does it not rather seem that men who can do this have been “marked in their conscience as with a branding iron,” rendering it seared and insensitive to any guilt prickings? Is that why Ochoa and Smith have not “renounced the underhanded things of which to be ashamed,” but continue “walking in craftiness,” one pretending to write and the other publishing what is not theirs? Their continuing careers in plagiarism call to mind the words: “Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush.”—1 Tim. 4:2, NW; Jer. 6:15.

Amos 8:11 (AS) states: “Behold, the days come, saith the Lord Jehovah, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of Jehovah.” This spiritual famine is now on in the churches of Christendom, whether they be the fundamentalist groups whose creeds are based on pagan teachings such as trinity and purgatory and eternal torment, or the modernist cults that embrace worldly philosophies and unprovable evolution theories. This famine explains the moral collapse and spiritual anemia rampant in Christendom at the present time. On the other hand, why are Jehovah’s witnesses so zealous in preaching and so enduring under persecution, as Churches of Christ Lovell noted? Because they are spiritually well fed. Can a man do heavy physical labor on starvation rations? Neither can a man zealously preach and faithfully endure as a Christian when deprived of wholesome spiritual food.

WHY OBJECT?

No honest person would condone plagiarism. It is against the law. But our purpose in objecting to it is for an additional reason. Jesus warned his disciples: “Be on the alert and watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” By “yeast” was meant false religious teachings. Paul showed what the result would be of mixing such yeast with the truth, when he announced the principle: “A little yeast ferments the whole lump.” By mixing the false with the true the entire presentation is spoiled. It is like spoiling good wine with water. As Paul further said: “What fellowship does light have with darkness?” (Matt. 16:6, 11, 12; Gal. 5:9; 2 Cor. 6:14, NW) Since we believe the teachings of the Churches of Christ are erroneous we do not approve of our articles based on Bible truth being wrapped up in the same package with theirs, being made a part of the lump in which their yeast ferments. Also, some sincere readers of the Gospel Broadcast may see in the articles plagiarized from our magazines the message of truth; they would naturally look to that religious group as the source of such truths and put trust in it. This would leave them exposed to the falsehoods taught by that group.

Viewing it from the standpoint of the Churches of Christ: if they think we are wrong and they are right, why would they want to contaminate their message with what they consider our error? The Scriptural principle outlined in the preceding paragraph operates, regardless of which is right and which is wrong. Maybe Ochoa and Smith are not sure they are right. Surely they would not reprint as their own The Watchtower and Awake! if they thought those magazines in error. And if the writers for and the editor of the Gospel Broadcast are so unstable, how can the readers feel confident in the paper’s guidance? Readers can hereafter wonder when they see its articles: Are they by Churches of Christ ministers as it says, or are they reprints from the Watchtower or Awake! magazines? How can readers hereafter rely on that paper or its writers or its editor?

Christ Jesus said: “Be on the watch for the false prophets that come to you in sheep’s covering, but inside they are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will recognize them. Never do people gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles, do they? Likewise every good tree produces fine fruit, but every rotten tree produces bad fruit; a good tree cannot bear bad fruit, neither can a rotten tree produce fine fruit. Every tree not producing fine fruit gets cut down and thrown into the fire. Really, then, by their fruits you will recognize those men.” (Matt. 7:15-20, NW) So the conclusion of the matter is an easy application of this rule given by Christ. Do you think plagiarism is fine fruit from a good tree? Or do you think it is bad fruit from a rotten tree? You answer for yourself.

[Footnotes]

September 4 Constantine’s Cross August 1, 1951

March 12 Do You Have Hearing Ears? May 15, 1952

April 16 God’s People and the Bible November 1, 1952

April 23 God’s People and the Bible November 1, 1952

Additionally, the September 4, 1952, Gospel Broadcast copied from the October 8, 1951, Awake! The August 28, 1952, Gospel Broadcast article “Was Peter the First Pope?” was copied from the June 1, 1951, Watchtower, but was not credited to Ochoa. Whether this meant another Churches of Christ minister was following in Ochoa’s footsteps or not we cannot say. A pamphlet entitled “God’s People and the Bible” by Ochoa was copied from The Watchtower, but the publishers did not identify themselves.

[Picture on page 36]

Ochoa-Smith Plagiarism Mill

Herod the Great, Wanton Murderer

WHAT the Bible records regarding the various Herods is very brief. In going to secular or profane history for additional information it is both interesting and strengthening to faith to note how truly representative of the individual Herods those fragmentary Scriptural references really are.

The Herods and their immediate predecessors ruled in Palestine during the greater part of both the first century before Christ and the first century after Christ. They were Idumeans, or Edomites, whose people the Maccabean princes of the Jews had subjugated in the second century B.C. Early in the first century B.C., an Idumean, one Antipas, was appointed by the then ruling Jewish prince to be governor of Idumea. Upon his death he was succeeded by his son Antipater. This Antipater succeeded in causing strife between the members of the Jewish royal family from which he benefited, so that Julius Caesar made him governor of Judea as well as a Roman citizen.

At the time Antipater was appointed governor of Judea he gave the governorship of Galilee to his son Herod and that of Jerusalem to another son, Phasael.

According to Josephus, when Herod was made governor in 47 B.C. he was very young, only fifteen years of age. (Antiq. 14:9, 2) Some historians insist that a copyist’s error crept in here and that the record should read twenty-five years, so as to correspond with other dates given by Josephus. Herod distinguished himself by ridding his territory of robber bands, whom he summarily executed without due process of law, much to the consternation of the Sanhedrin, whose authority he openly flouted. In 43 B.C. he succeeded his father, who had been poisoned by a Jewish general, but only after first putting down a revolt. He also had his father’s assassin slain without legal formalities.

In 40 B.C. Herod had to flee for his life because of a successful revolt by the Jewish Asmonéan prince Antigonus. His brother failed to make a getaway and was forced to commit suicide. Herod eventually reached Rome, where he succeeded in obtaining the crown from the triumvirs Antony and Octavian. Returning, Herod gradually was able to gather to himself a Roman army of sufficient size to take Jerusalem and to establish himself as king of Judea in 37 B.C. Upon taking the city Herod executed forty-five of the leading partisans of Antigonus and later also Antigonus himself. All the Sanhedrin save two were likewise slain at Herod’s command. Envious of the popularity of one of his brothers-in-law, a mere youth whom he had appointed high priest, Herod had him drowned and then feigned great sorrow at his death.

Herod had ten wives in all, of whom Mariamne, of the Jewish royal family, was the most beautiful. He was so jealous of her that on two occasions when he left for distant parts he gave secret orders that should he fail to return she was to be slain. Each time the one to whom he gave this order betrayed it to his wife. This involved each in the charge of adultery and as a result Herod had all three executed.

Cunning and craftiness must be added to Herod’s base traits. Adroitly he switched his allegiance to Julius Caesar, to Cassius, to Antony and to Octavian and gained favors from them.

King Herod was also an ambitious builder. He caused to be constructed theaters, amphitheaters, hippodromes, citadels, fortresses, monuments and even cities, which he named after himself, his relatives or the emperors. He built an artificial harbor city, Caesarea, which rivaled the seaport Tyre; he rebuilt Samaria, and carried on vast building projects in many other lands, in Tyre, in Sidon and in cities as far removed as Athens and Antioch.

He built many temples throughout his land in honor of Caesar Augustus, and a magnificent temple at Rhodes to the pagan deity Apollo. On Mount Zion he built a palace for himself as well as the famed “Herod’s temple” for the Jews, which took forty-six years to fully complete. (John 2:20) At the time it was said concerning it: “He who has not seen Herod’s temple has not seen anything beautiful.”

But wicked Herod, in spite of his achievements, had no peace. The slaying of his beautiful wife Mariamne filled him with remorse. While currying the favor of the Jews by the construction of such a magnificent temple, he estranged himself from them by his idolatries, his foreign-building projects and by his appointment of Greek counselors. To many of the Jews he seemed to be no better than that Syrian ruler Antiochus Epiphanes, who tried to force the Greek religion and culture upon the Jews and against whom the Maccabees (Asmonéans) rebelled in the first place. Repeatedly the Jews made conspiracies to take his life and as a result one of his fortresses was continually filled with seditious Jews who, after a brief detention, were executed. Toward the closing years of his reign he had two of his own sons executed on suspicion of sedition and, while on his deathbed, a third son.

Licentious living—Herod was wanton in this respect also—brought upon him loathsome diseases from which he suffered greatly, his palace resounding with his cries. He consulted physicians, took baths, but all to no avail. Sensing that the Jews would rejoice at the news of his death, he determined to have mourning at his death such as no king had ever had before. To this end he ordered all the principal men of Jewry brought to Jericho, where he was staying at the time, and incarcerated in the hippodrome, and then gave secret instructions that upon his death, before the news was to be given out, all these men were to be slain. These latter instructions, however, were not carried out.

MATTHEW’S ACCOUNT LEGENDARY?

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. 6, page 360, Herod’s connection “with the alleged massacre of the Innocents as related in the New Testament is now generally admitted by independent Christian thinkers to be legendary.” Evidently such ‘thinkers’ base their conclusions on the fact that this incident was not recorded by Josephus or other historians of the time.

However, for truly Christian thinkers that is no proof at all. They stand by God’s Word as true though it makes all men liars. (John 17:17; Rom. 3:4, NW) To deny the authenticity of Matthew, chapter two, would be to deny also the authenticity of Jeremiah 31:15, which prophetically foretold the incident, as well as remove the basis for the fulfillment of the prophecy at Hosea 11:1, regarding Jehovah’s calling his Son out of Egypt. (Matt. 2:15) Numerous reasons might be given why Josephus and others failed to mention this event, intentionally or unintentionally; and, besides, the number of times that archaeology has verified the Bible on points on which secular historians were silent estops any doubting of Matthew’s account simply because it was not mentioned by others!

Some question Matthew’s account because the date of Herod’s death is generally given as 4 B.C., at the age of seventy years, whereas Bible chronology indicates that Jesus was born 2 B.C. (Compare Luke 3:1, 23 with Daniel’s prophecy of “seventy weeks” at Daniel 9:24-27, and which weeks of years began in 455 B.C.) However, note the following:

According to Josephus’ Antiquities, Book 14, chapter 16, (¶1, 4) Herod took possession of Jerusalem in the summer of 37 B.C., and actually began to rule more than three years after he had been appointed to be king of Judea by the Roman senate. It is from this year, then, rather than from the earlier date, that Herod’s 37-year reign mentioned by Josephus in Book 17, chapter 8 (¶1), should be counted. On the basis of this calculation Herod’s death would fall in 1 B.C. or A.D. 1, which would easily allow for Jesus’ birth to fall in 2 B.C. during Herod’s reign, and for the visit of the magi to Herod thereafter and then the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.

Among the proofs given for Herod’s death as occurring 4 B.C. is that he ordered the burning alive of two Jewish seditionists shortly before his death and that on the night they were executed there was an eclipse of the moon, and it is calculated that there was such an eclipse March 13, 4 B.C. But a lunar eclipse is not a sufficient date by which to locate the year of a certain event, because in any year there usually are two eclipse seasons and in many years two eclipses of the moon may be seen in a certain part of the earth. In fact, while only one partial eclipse is recorded for 4 B.C., three are given for 1 B.C., and they complete ones. So, on the basis of the eclipse, 1 B.C. would have a stronger claim than 4 B.C.

In this regard it is interesting to note that authorities differ greatly as to how old Herod was when he became governor in 47 B.C.; also that according to Appleton’s Cyclopedia, when it comes to dates, Josephus “is altogether too careless to be taken into account.” Thus the date of Herod’s death furnishes no obstacle to accepting the account of the slaughter of young boys mentioned by Matthew. And certainly in view of what we have seen about Herod’s disposition, his many murders and his scheme to slay all the principal men of Jewry so that there would be great mourning at his death, yes, everything we know about him is in keeping with that event.

Archelaus, the Ruthless Ethnarch

WITH Archelaus, son and successor of King Herod, the proverb held true, “like father, like son,” for he is described as “cruel and tyrannical, sensual in the extreme, a hypocrite and a plotter.” His policies resulted in his being banished by the Roman emperor, thus bearing out the Scriptural principle that “he that is cruel troubleth his own flesh.”—Prov. 11:17, AS.

Just a few days before he died King Herod made a final will in which he designated Archelaus instead of Antipas as heir to his throne and willed him half of his dominion, two other sons being given each one fourth. But due to opposition the best that Archelaus could secure from the Roman emperor Augustus was the title of ethnarch, a title considerably inferior to that of king although more honored than that of tetrarch, or territorial prince. However, he did receive, with the exception of a few important cities, the territory his father had willed him, namely Judea, Samaria and Idumea.

The rule of Archelaus was marked with turbulence even before he left for Rome to get the terms of his father’s will validated by the emperor. Like Rehoboam, Solomon’s son, he had inherited a land whose people were seething with discontent because of the burdens placed upon them by his much-married and construction-minded father. (1 Kings 12) And like Rehoboam, Archelaus handled the matter unwisely. Failing to sense the temper of the people, he soon had such a disturbance on his hands that before it was quelled the bodies of some three thousand Jews defiled the temple pavements. And after Archelaus left for Rome matters went from bad to worse. An armed uprising spread throughout the land, which was put down at the cost of the lives of thousands of Roman soldiers and of so many Jews that their tradition records it as one of the worst massacres in their history.

On his return Archelaus continued his unwise policies. His oppressive measures caused him to be summoned to Rome to answer charges made against him by the Jews and the Samaritans, who suffered even more at his hands. Caesar Augustus, after giving him a hearing, had him banished.

In view of these facts we can readily understand why Joseph, the foster father of Jesus, ‘upon hearing that Archelaus was ruling in Judea became afraid to depart for there but instead, upon being given divine warning in a dream, withdrew into the territory of Galilee [over which the tetrarch Herod Antipas ruled] and settled in a city named Nazareth.’—Matt. 2:22, 23, NW.

Herod Antipas, “That Fox”

KING Herod the Great on his deathbed made a new will, as already noted, in which he left half of his dominion to his son Archelaus, and one fourth each to his sons Philip and Herod Antipas. The fourth, or “tetrarchy” of Herod Antipas, consisted of Galilee and Perea, where Jesus did much of his preaching. While both Philip and Herod Antipas were “tetrarchs,” ‘rulers over one fourth’ of a province, the term was also applied to any minor district ruler or territorial prince. (Luke 3:1, NW, footnote) In this connection let it be noted that although Herod Antipas is referred to at Mark 6:14 as “King Herod,” he was not a king in the same sense that Herod the Great was.

Herod Antipas seems to have been a weakling whose desire to please men and his wife caused him to compromise and eventually led to his undoing. In some respects he might be likened to King Ahab, and his wife certainly was another Jezebel, for she hated John the Baptist every bit as much as Jezebel hated John’s prototype, Elijah.—Matt. 17:10-13.

Herod Antipas, disappointed by his father’s deathbed change in his will, went to Rome in the hope of gaining more honor and territory; and not only once, but time and again. But all in vain. During one of his visits at Rome he was invited to stay at the home of one of his half brothers, Philip (not to be confused with another half brother Philip the tetrarcha), who had married his own niece Herodias. She was ambitious to be a queen and proceeded to play upon his emotions so successfully that Herod took her with him when he returned to Galilee, necessitating his divorcing his first wife, the daughter of the Arabian King Aretas, who returned to her father’s palace.

This adulterous union, which scandalized the Jews, did not go unnoticed by John the Baptist, and so during his year of preaching he repeatedly told Antipas: “It is not lawful for you to be having the wife of your brother.” Guilty Herodias wanted him killed for this, but Antipas would go no farther than having John imprisoned, for he “stood in fear of John, knowing him to be a righteous and holy man; and he was keeping him safe. And after hearing him he was at a great loss what to do, yet he continued to hear him gladly.”—Mark 6:17-20, NW.

Yes, Antipas continued to hear John gladly until at a birthday party he unwittingly committed himself to John’s execution; but only because saving his face was more important to him than the life of a righteous man. So “in view of the oaths and those reclining at his table” he gave orders to have John beheaded to comply with the request made by his stepdaughter Salome at the instance of her mother Herodias.—Mark 6:21-28, NW.

When Antipas heard of Jesus’ miracles he concluded that John had been raised from the dead, and so was anxious to see him. (Matt. 14:1, 2; Luke 9:7-9, NW) When certain Pharisees tried to frighten Jesus by telling him that Antipas was seeking to kill him Jesus gave them a stinging answer to transmit to Antipas, “that fox.”—Luke 13:31, 32.

Herod Antipas finally did get to see Jesus when Pilate tried to shift the responsibility of giving Jesus justice by sending Jesus to him. His curiosity, however, was not satisfied, for Jesus did not perform any miracles; in fact, Jesus did not even answer his questions. Disappointed, and noting the vehement denunciations the Jewish clergy were making against Jesus, Antipas joined his soldiers in poking fun at Jesus, after which he returned his prisoner to Pilate, the superior authority as far as Rome was concerned. Up till this time Pilate and Herod Antipas had been enemies, apparently due to certain accusations Antipas had leveled against Pilate out of envy, but now they became fast friends.—Luke 23:7-12, NW.

Again Antipas had allowed his desire to please men result in the sacrifice of a servant of Jehovah, and this time none other than the Son of God.

As the years went by Antipas wearied of his efforts to gain the royal title and more territory, but not Herodias. Noting a new emperor at Rome, Caligula, she gave her husband no peace until he agreed to try it again. But instead of gaining more, he lost everything. Reports insinuating that Antipas was plotting sedition reached the emperor the same time that Antipas and Herodias did. Unable to satisfactorily refute the charges, Antipas was banished and his wealth and territory were given to others. Herodias voluntarily chose to go with her husband; but this must have given him small comfort in view of the fact that she had been instrumental in his fall. He had listened to her once too often.

[Footnotes]

Herod Agrippa, Persecutor of Christians

IN THE record of King Herod Agrippa I we find emphasized the fact that Jehovah is a God “exacting exclusive devotion” and so is displeased not only with those who worship creatures but with creatures who accept worship from others.—Ex. 20:5, NW.

This Agrippa’s father was one of the sons of Herod the Great, whom he slew on suspicion of sedition in the closing years of his life. Brought up in Rome, Agrippa’s lot fluctuated radically between prosperity and adversity for years. Thinking himself alone, he once openly expressed the wish that his friend Caligula were emperor. Emperor Tiberius, hearing of this, had Agrippa put in prison, where for months his life was in constant jeopardy. With the death of Tiberius, Caligula came to the throne, and not only released Agrippa but also made him a king over certain minor territories in Palestine.

When Caligula banished Herod Antipas on suspicion of sedition, he gave Agrippa that one’s territories of Galilee and Perea. Later, when Claudius succeeded Caligula, Claudius rewarded Agrippa for certain valuable services Agrippa had rendered to him by adding Judea and Samaria to his dominion so that now Herod Agrippa I became king of all Palestine, even as his grandfather Herod the Great had been.

Like his grandfather and most of his uncles, Agrippa I indulged his fondness for building, but different from them he professed great devotion to Judaism, religiously taking part in the ceremonies and festivals and did what he could to lighten the Roman yoke that rested upon the Jews. His sincerity in this might be questioned, since we are told that he “made many considerable concessions to heathen customs and manners”; and especially as he pressed his persecution of Christians simply because he noted that it pleased the Jews, as Luke tells us.—Acts 12:1-19, NW.

Some time after he had slain James the brother of John, and after the angel had delivered Peter from his clutches, A.D. 44, Agrippa I appeared at a feast in honor of Claudius Caesar. According to Josephus he was clothed in silver garments, which, shining in splendor in the morning sun, caused the people to shout upon hearing his voice the words recorded in the Bible: “A god’s voice, and not a man’s.” In that instant “the angel of Jehovah struck him, because he did not give the glory to God; and he became eaten up with worms and expired.” (Acts 12:20-23, NW) Early in his reign, while yet in his prime, King Herod Agrippa I was ‘soon taken away by his Maker for having become a party to giving flattering titles.’—Job 32:21, 22.

Herod Agrippa II Resists Conversion

ACCORDING to historians the last of the Herods was Herod Agrippa II, son of Herod Agrippa I. While not professing his father’s devotion to the law of Moses, it is apparent from his treatment of the apostle Paul that he had far more of its spirit as summed up in the “Golden Rule”: “All things, therefore, that you want men to do to you, you also must likewise do to them.”—Matt. 7:12, NW.

Due to the fact that Agrippa II was only seventeen years old when his father died so suddenly, the Roman emperor was persuaded by his counselors not to give the youth his father’s rule over all Palestine. Instead, the emperor gave the youth only the rulership over the small principality of Chalcis on the western slope of the Anti-Lebanon range, together with the superintendence of the temple at Jerusalem and the right to appoint the high priest. However, as the years went by his territory was increased.

In the Bible he comes to our attention because of the witness the apostle Paul gave to him at the time Agrippa II and his sister Bernice paid a courtesy call on Governor Festus. Paul, who at the time was a prisoner of Festus (a charge Festus inherited from his predecessor Felix), expressed himself as happy to be able to make his defense before one so familiar with Jewish customs.

Resisting Paul’s eloquent testimony Agrippa said to Paul: “In a short time you would persuade me to become a Christian.” Paul, continuing his entreaty, replied: “I could wish to God that whether in a short time or in a long time not only you but also all those who hear me today would become men such as I also am, with the exception of these bonds.” His father would have handed him over to the Jews for punishment, but Agrippa II said: “This man could have been released if he had not appealed to Caesar.”—Acts 26:1-32, NW.

It was during the life of Agrippa II that the Jews’ rebellion against Rome finally led to their national suicide. Josephus records a well-reasoned and earnest appeal that Agrippa II made, endeavoring to turn the Jews from their rebellious course. He pleaded with them to consider how small they were and how great was the might of Rome. But his words fell on deaf ears. Failing to dissuade them, Agrippa II at last left the Jews and attached himself to the conquering armies of Rome and shared the fruits of their victories, while the Jews experienced the fulfillment of Jesus’ words regarding their national destruction.—Luke 19:41-44; 21:20-22, NW.

Thirty years after that destruction, or about the year 100, Herod Agrippa II died without any offspring, thus marking the end of the line of the Herods.

Rearing Children in the New World Society

“These words that I am commanding you today must prove to be on your heart, and you must inculcate them in your son and speak of them when you sit in your house and when you walk on the road and when you lie down and when you get up.”—Deut. 6:6, 7, NW.

1. Wherein do men and Jehovah disagree?

JEHOVAH says it is not in man that walks to direct his steps. Men say man can direct his steps. So they refuse divine direction, accept human direction, walk into one mess after another, and prove God true. Jehovah says there is a way that seems right to a man, but the end is the way of death. Men have long taken the way that seemed right to them, and it has led to war, famine, sickness and death. The way that seems right to man seems wrong to God. The way man walks is not the way God directs.—Prov. 14:12; Jer. 10:23.

2. Into what folly do modern men plunge concerning child training?

² If the way that seems right to a man ends in death, how can the way that seems right to a child end elsewhere? If it is not in man that walks to direct his steps, how can it be in the child that toddles to direct its steps? Yet modern man, who directs his steps from mess to mess and whose way winds up in the ditch of destruction, says the modern child should direct its own steps, should choose its own way. This method is called “self-regulation,” and one of its more fanatic advocates writes: “Obviously self-regulation must not be accompanied by parental frowns or angry words. The baby must be approved of all the way and all the time. . . . The child’s chief aim in life is to be loved, and every spank, every moral lecture, every frown means to the child that he is not loved. . . . To impose fear on a child is the unpardonable sin, and I hasten to say that fear does not necessarily mean spanking or storming, for the most mealy-mouthed mother can instill fear in her children by a disapproving look.” They argue that discipline inhibits the child, frustrates it, stunts its personality.

3, 4. What shocking delinquency marks our day?

³ Well, here are some personalities that should have been stunted. A 15-year-old boy stabs to death a 10-year-old girl. Why? He answers, “I suddenly felt an overpowering impulse to kill.” A 16-year-old killed a man with a hammer. His reason, “I felt a sudden desire to kill someone—it didn’t matter who.” Another 16-year-old shot and killed three sisters and their brother, explaining, “I kinda wondered what it would feel like to kill somebody.” A 15-year-old boy told police he knifed to death his best friend at a revival tent meeting because, “He hit me with a songbook.” A 16-year-old boy killed his friend for tickling his feet while he slept. Because his mother would not let him use the family car to go to a basketball game, a teen-ager took a shotgun, killed his mother, his 11-year-old brother, his 6-year-old sister, took the car, and went to the game. Two brothers with a rifle downed a man from a distance, then as they advanced toward the injured man took turns firing shots into his body, with a final one at point-blank range going into his brain. Still another teen-ager went on a wild week end of murder. His victims screamed. He cannot stand screaming. He shrugged off five killings as “too bad.”

⁴ Last July the front-page headlines of a New York newspaper read: “Girl Gang War with Knives Nipped in Bud.” The report said: “A girl gang fight with ice picks, switchblade knives and butcher knives was averted, although battle lines had already formed, when cops responded to a call.” The battle had been agreed upon as a result of a quarrel over boys. Gang wars between teen-agers are unbelievable, but they are true. Rival gangs meet by appointment, battle with guns, knives, clubs and even home-made gasoline explosives known as “Molotov cocktails.” In one case rival gangs fought, a boy was lashed to the front bumper of a car, the driverless car sent down a hill, the crash at the bottom killed him. Again, two teen-age gangs met, a fight started, five shots rang out, five kids fell down, three wounded and two dead.

5. In view of the fruit produced by modern methods, to what conclusion do some arrive?

⁵ Men can harness the atom, but they cannot harness their children. Child psychologists oppose it, favoring progressive methods shorn of restraints. But with child psychologists to direct, why does delinquency increase? If the theories of training they have planted are so good, why are the fruits harvested so bad? We have only nibbled at the record of juvenile delinquency, but that small taste told us the fruit is rotten. Recently a leading New York newspaper ran a series on teen-age crime and gang wars, and, after noting the rise of progressive methods of child training that all but discard discipline, said: “Many of those fighting teen-age crime are convinced this lack of discipline is to blame for many children refusing to accept normal standards of behavior.” J. Edgar Hoover has investigated the causes of juvenile delinquency and claims ninety per cent of it is traceable to lack of parental discipline. A Brooklyn court judge contributes this caustic comment: “I think we need the woodshed for some young folks. But that is not considered fashionable now. Now we are told you must not strike a child; you may be stunting a genius.”

6. What should replace the modern methods?

⁶ But is there springing up around us a bumper crop of unstunted geniuses? Rather are we not reaping a record harvest of juvenile delinquents? Good trees produce fine fruit, not rotten harvests. Maybe the theories planted by child psychologists are not good trees, but rotten. Rotten trees should be chopped down. Modern methods should be uprooted and in their place should be planted proper parental discipline. Not parental discipline in ways that seem right to men, since it is in neither parent nor child to direct steps or choose right ways unassisted. Look to Jehovah God! He will direct both parent and child in right ways. He directs the parent through His Word; he directs the child through its divinely instructed parent. So trust in Jehovah, lean not on self. Acknowledge him in this matter, and he will direct your path.—Prov. 3:5, 6; Matt. 7:16-20.

7. What obligation falls upon the parent, and how can he meet it?

⁷ To parents Jehovah says: “These words that I am commanding you today must prove to be on your heart, and you must inculcate them in your son and speak of them when you sit in your house and when you walk on the road and when you lie down and when you get up.” (Deut. 6:6, 7, NW) The parents were obligated to instruct, the children to listen and learn. No limitations as to time or place were put on this instruction. Whenever appropriate, wherever convenient, whatever suitable situation presented itself, instruction should be given. But in addition the parents should set aside specific times for home study with their children. It might be a discussion of the text at breakfast, or a study during the day or evening in one of the Society’s bound books, or of a Bible chapter, or of a secondary article in The Watchtower, or one of the themes in “Make Sure of All Things”, or a review of points presented at a congregational meeting.

8. What should and what should not be done relative to children and meetings?

⁸ The children certainly should attend these meetings and sit quietly. Note that the attendance of children is a divine command: “Call the people together, the men and the women and the little ones and your temporary resident who is within your gates, in order that they may listen and in order that they may learn, as they must fear Jehovah your God and take care to carry out all the words of this law.” (Deut. 31:12, NW) The little ones were not to be segregated from parents, not to be shunted off into some Sunday school to have special instruction, but were to remain in the one congregation “in order that they may listen and in order that they may learn.” And to what were they to listen? To the Law specially written and simplified for consumption by children? No, they gave ear to such complicated things as Leviticus! They listened and learned, and when they failed to understand they questioned their parents later. Today little ones are not to be sidetracked into a soundproof room to romp, nor is it wise to supply them with trinkets to toy with and drop during meetings. Remember Jehovah’s purpose for ordering their presence is “in order that they may listen and in order that they may learn.” If little ones in Israel could listen to Leviticus and learn, youngsters today can listen to much lighter material and learn. This way may not seem right to men, but it is right to God.

IMPORTANCE OF PARENTAL EXAMPLE

9. How did Jesus show the imitative trait in children?

⁹ Instruction by speaking and reading can accomplish much, but instruction by example accomplishes more. Parents are examples to their children, whether they want to be or not. Children are specially susceptible to examples, having a natural tendency to imitate. Jesus showed this when he said: “With whom shall I compare this generation? It is like young children sitting in the marketplaces who cry out to their playmates, saying: ‘We played the flute for you, but you did not dance; we wailed, but you did not beat yourselves in grief.’” (Matt. 11:16, 17, NW) Jesus’ generation was unco-operative and impossible to satisfy, like the playmates that would not respond with dancing when other children played the flute or with grief when their fellows wailed. But the point is that the children in their games were imitating adults. Adults held weddings accompanied by music and dancing; they also conducted funerals with much wailing and grief. In their games the children were imitating these adult activities.

10. Of what should parents be sure, and what may they expect?

¹⁰ Be sure your activities as parents are worthy of imitation. Do you regularly study at home the Bible and Bible helps? Do you attend area book studies, congregational Watchtower studies and service meetings and ministry school sessions? Do you sit quietly and listen, and offer comments when the opportunity is presented? Do you engage in field service regularly, taking your children along? Do they observe you in door-to-door work, back-call work and home Bible study work, hearing you make effective presentations? If they do, do not be surprised to see them playing door-to-door service with their playmates or conducting a study with a doll or giving a student talk to an imaginary audience. Some parents have even encouraged their children in such games, with good results.

11. What is the first requirement for parents to train children for life in the new world?

¹¹ Anyway, in view of this imitative trait in children, to train your children to live in the new world the first requirement is to train yourself to live in it. You act the way you want your children to act, be the way you want your children to be. They will tend to imitate you. Not only is this true relative to theocratic activities, but it is specially true with respect to personal conduct. If your moral standard is high, if your principles are good, if you are kind and courteous and considerate to all, then your children will gravitate in those directions. If you are quiet, respectful, honest, merciful, faithful and loving, those qualities will tend to rub off on your children.

12. With what searching questions can parents examine themselves?

¹² It is of little value to tell your child what you did when you were a boy or girl its age. It did not see you then; it sees you now. It is not so much what you did then, as what you do now; not what you did as a child, but what you do as an adult. Do you have two sets of principles, one to preach and the other to practice, one for yourself and the other for your child? Of course, adults may do things children should not, yet the basic principles that govern are usually the same. Do you whisper during meetings, yet scold your child when it causes disturbance? Do you wander around during sessions at large assemblies, yet discipline your child if it does the same at the local congregation? After telling your child not to talk about others, do you gossip? Do you tell it not to lie, then lie yourself? Do you break your promises to it, but expect it to keep its promises to you? Do you demand more of it than you do of yourself?

13. What may result if parents are inconsistent in word and deed?

¹³ Never forget that your actions speak louder than your tongue, that your example says more than your words. Sometimes if you practice your principles you do not even have to preach them. Some things may seem trivial, but if they violate a principle you are trying to instill in your child they do harm. The child may think you are inconsistent and unreliable, and feel it too can ignore principles. Your training and precepts must be consistent or the child will not know where it stands with you, will not be sure that when you say a thing you will do it, that when you promise you will perform, that when you threaten you will fulfill. If you say but do not do, you will be like the hypocritical Pharisees of whom Jesus said: “They say but do not perform.” (Matt. 23:3, NW) What they said was all right; what they did was all wrong. A child spots insincerity and hypocrisy and dislikes it; but he will also copy it for selfish advantage. So, parents, if you do not want little Pharisees do not be big Pharisees.

14. Why are parents largely responsible for the present juvenile delinquency?

¹⁴ Parental example has been blamed for much of the present juvenile delinquency, justly so. A prominent New York city judge cited two factors as responsible for delinquency: (1) men in high places that hobnob with and protect criminals, and (2) lack of parental guidance. A youth forum discussing the problem of delinquency “emphasized the failure of parents in the home and the breakdown in the moral code in a large segment of the population.” One educator said that the “difference between the morals taught to children by their elders and the actual life these elders live . . . is contributing to the increase of delinquency in America.” Adults write fiction, draw comics, make movies, sponsor television, compose music, publish ads, and in these and many other things they flood the mind with sex and immorality, thievery and murder, violence and war. These are the rotten fruits of the fallen flesh that are jammed into youthful minds, whereas the Bible says the minds of both young and old are to dwell on the good fruits of the spirit of Jehovah. It is Jehovah’s law that our innermost thoughts eventually find expression in word and deed. (Gal. 5:22-24; Phil. 4:8; Matt. 12:34, 35) If wrong thinking is not crowded out by right thinking, evil will eventually come to the surface and sink us in sin.

TRAINING DURING THE FORMATIVE YEARS

15. What anxious concern do God-fearing parents feel, but what advantage do they have?

¹⁵ This old world is sunk! It has sunk itself. It sows filth, it reaps filth. It mocks God, but not with impunity. (Gal. 6:7, 8) Yet it is amid these sullied seas of delinquent humanity that we must navigate a course of morality and integrity, and one of the most anxious concerns of faithful parents is that their children will not sink in these seas when they venture from the home port. Well, it is certainly true that, as Paul said, “Bad associations spoil useful habits.” (1 Cor. 15:33, NW) However, parents that are in the truth when their children are born have a blessed advantage. They have a head start on worldly associations. They have exclusive association with the child the first few months, and are its chief association for the first few years, before it starts to school. If the parental association is good it will entrench useful habits before bad associations make their assaults. When evil forces finally get at the child for attack he can repel their advance. Remember, wisdom is a defense and preserves the life of him who has it.—Eccl. 7:12.

16. What false reasoning causes some to lose this advantage, and how does the Bible prove this reasoning false?

¹⁶ Yet a frequent parental blunder is to throw away the precious advantage by deferring theocratic training till years later. They send the youngster out into worldly associations without the defense of divine wisdom, thinking the small child’s mind incapable of grasping basic truths and principles. They seem oblivious of the fact that the infant mind can learn a complicated language in a short time. That is a feat that taxes an adult mind. Since the infant is going to learn a language, why not let it be the pure language? Why not put in its vocabulary words that will give praise to Jehovah? (Zeph. 3:9; Ps. 148:12, 13) Why not let theocratic teaching get first entry into the mind, rather than defer it for years while inferior information is absorbed? Timothy’s mother and grandmother made no mistake by teaching him while he was an infant, did they? And they used the Scriptures, not a simplified child’s book. They were not over his head, for he came to know the Scriptures. Paul approvingly mentioned Timothy’s babyhood training years later: “From infancy you have known the holy writings which are able to make you wise for salvation.” (2 Tim. 3:15, NW) Some say small children get nothing out of attending meetings, but Jehovah says take them “in order that they may listen and in order that they may learn.” How can they remember their Creator in the days of their youth if they never hear about their Creator in the days of their youth?—Eccl. 12:1.

17. Why is it advisable to start theocratic training early in life?

¹⁷ By the impact and impression of his Word upon us Jehovah molds us as clay vessels of mercy or of wrath. (Rom. 9:20-24) The fresher clay is the easier it is to mold. The longer it sets the harder it gets. It is easier for us to be molded into conformity with Jehovah’s Word if that Word is brought to bear upon us while we are young instead of waiting till we are old and more set in our ways. The young are more pliable, and the younger the better. Jesus used a child as an example of humility, saying his followers must become as such. (Matt. 18:1-4) A babe is unstable and needs direction, as shown by Isaiah’s referring to the time “before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.” (Isa. 7:16; Eph. 4:14) The tender years are the formative years, and forming will take place, for good or for bad. Parents must make the forming for good, based on right principles, or other influences will make it for bad, and by the time tardy parents think theocratic training should start they may find a hardened stand against it.—Prov. 19:18, RS.

18. What findings confirm the wisdom of giving training in infancy?

¹⁸ A newspaper editorial lamenting that the junior crime wave is becoming a tidal wave states: “Experts now agree that if we would prevent delinquency we must reach children in the pre-school years.” In one of the most comprehensive studies of juvenile delinquency ever made, taking ten years, the major finding was that it is primarily the home life that determines whether the child will become delinquent or not. The survey found that if the family life was wholesome the chances of the child’s becoming delinquent were only 3 in 100, whereas if parent-child relations were bad the chances of the child’s going wrong were 98 out of 100. So while there may be scattered exceptions, the general rule of Proverbs 22:6 holds true: “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.”

19. What experience may comfort parents who worry about the effect of bad worldly associations on the children?

¹⁹ Here is an actual experience that may comfort parents who worry about their children’s being spoiled by bad worldly associations when they get beyond the protection of the family circle. A witness was conducting a Bible study with a woman in Brooklyn. Her 4-year-old son listened in. The father objected. He said let the boy wait till he is 21 to make a decision about religion. A few days later a schoolteacher came to the woman’s door and asked whether she was one of Jehovah’s witnesses. No, only studying with them, the woman said. Then the teacher told of seeing the little boy attacked by a group of children, of how she stopped the assault and learned the reason for it. The children wanted this little boy to acknowledge as God a statue in the neighborhood; it was not a religious statue but their religious training made the children think it was God. The 4-year-old boy refused to recognize it as God, told them it could not see, could not hear, could not speak, could not move, could not be God, and he would not call it God! For this he was mobbed. When the boy’s father heard about this he was amazed that his son had absorbed so much by sitting in on the Bible study and was so impressed by his son’s courage in standing firm against the juvenile mob that he changed and said his son could continue sharing in the study.—Jer. 10:5; Hab. 2:18, 19.

Disciplining Children for Life

“The reproofs of discipline are the way of life.”—Prov. 6:23, RS.

1. How are children admonished, and what question must be faced?

JEHOVAH admonishes children: “Keep your father’s commandment, and forsake not your mother’s teaching. Bind them upon your heart always; tie them about your neck. When you walk, they will lead you; when you lie down, they will watch over you; and when you awake, they will talk with you. For the commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life.” (Prov. 6:20-23, RS) Sometimes, though parents give the proper instruction and set the proper example, children refuse to obey. That brings us to discipline, and forces a facing of that hotly controversial question: to spank or not to spank.

2. What do many child psychologists say about spanking, but what does the Bible say?

² Many child psychologists put a “hands off” sign on children, as did one who said: “Do you mothers realize that every time you spank your child you show that you are hating your child?” Jehovah says: “He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him.” A spanking may be a lifesaver to a child, for Jehovah says: “Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you beat him with a rod, he will not die. If you beat him with the rod you will save his life from Sheol.” Again, “Blows that wound cleanse away evil; strokes make clean the innermost parts.” It is Jehovah who can peer into the innermost parts of men and children, and at one time, typical of our day, he did this and saw: “The inclination of the heart of man is bad from his youth up.” The remedy? “Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him.”—Prov. 13:24; 23:13, 14; 20:30, RS; Gen. 8:21, NW; Prov. 22:15, RS.

3. Why must corrective words sometimes be followed by corrective actions, and what are the contrasting results of pampering and disciplining?

³ With some children occasions arise when words fall short, and parents may have to become men and women of action, applying the rod to preserve the child from spoiling. Though it understands your words, it may not pay heed, as Proverbs 29:19 (AT) says: “Not by mere words can a servant be trained; for he understands, but will not pay heed.” Two verses later (Prov. 29:21, AT) it says: “He who pampers his servant from childhood will in the end gain nothing but ingratitude.” That also holds true for children pampered by parents. Children have no respect for the doting or negligent or indulgent parent that withholds correction; with such they only become more demanding and disrespectful. On the other hand, discipline that is wisely, fairly and mercifully administered gains respect, as Paul wrote to the Hebrews: “We used to have fathers who were of our flesh to discipline us and we used to give them respect. . . . True, no discipline seems for the present to be joyous, but grievous; yet afterward to those who have been trained by it it yields peaceable fruit, namely, righteousness.” (Heb. 12:9, 11, NW) Such discipline is to train, not inflict painful punishment.

4. When is discipline done in selfishness, and why must the individual child be considered in determining the form of discipline necessary?

⁴ In disciplining remember the proverb: “To act without reflection is not good; and to be over-hasty is to miss the mark.” To strike a blow in sudden anger is evidence of poor motive, namely, the release of the emotional pressure of a steamed-up parent. Such discipline is for selfish relief, not done out of love for the child. In many cases the solution may be found to lie between the two extremes of never spanking and always spanking. But this is not true in all cases. The temperament and disposition of the individual child must be considered. Some are very sensitive, and such drastic measures as spanking may not be necessary. Some may be so callous that such drastic measures may be ineffective. Concerning men these two proverbs are written: “On the lips of a sensible man wisdom is found; but a man without sense needs a rod for his back.” “A rebuke sinks deeper into a man of intelligence than a hundred lashes into a fool.” (Prov. 19:2; 10:13; 17:10, AT) So it is with children. Some are more sensible than others; some are meeker than others. A rebuke may discipline them more than a whipping would others who are more stubborn and in whose childish heart may be bound up a more than usual amount of folly.

5. Why should parents, of all people, be patient if their children are of a particularly unruly temperament?

⁵ Parents, if this is the case with your child, be patient. As unflattering, as unpalatable, as unacceptable as it may be to you, the child got it from you. In you it may be subdued, it may never have come to the surface; but it is in you somewhere, because your child did not get it from nowhere. We must face it: adults give their children a bad start. Adam and Eve gave everyone a bad start. Hence the Bible says: “Man that is born of a woman is of few days, and full of trouble. Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one.” “I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.”—Job 14:1, 4; Ps. 51:5; Rom. 5:12.

USE OF LOVE AND GOOD SENSE IN DISCIPLINING

6. What must be remembered in the making and enforcing of rules?

⁶ This shows children need guidance; it also shows they will not be perfect. Expect neither too much nor too little. The rules of conduct should be clear to them, and fair and with merciful allowances. Remember their age, for they will act it. Do not expect them to act like little adults. Paul said that when he was a babe he acted like one. (1 Cor. 13:11) After reasonable rules are established and the child knows them, enforce them with promptness and consistency, so the child knows what to expect. But if they are spasmodically enforced according to your whim or mood of the moment, or if punishment for disobedience is long delayed, the child will be emboldened to chance violations to see how far he can go and how much he can get away with, just as adults become bold in evil-doing when retribution seems to lag: “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is emboldened in them to do evil.” If discipline is not fair and consistent the very keen sense of justice possessed by children will be offended and resentment arise. So correct in fairness and firmness, tempered by love and mercy. Jehovah remembers our frame is dust; let us remember the child’s also is dust.—Eccl. 8:11, AS, margin; Knox; Ps. 103:13, 14.

7. How do some parents violate the instructions given at Ephesians 6:4 and Colossians 3:21, and why must time and place be considered?

⁷ Some parents are always nagging at their children, harping about things that do not really matter, building up feelings of annoyance and irritation and exasperation in their children, making them rebellious and downhearted, all in violation of the following Bible instructions to parents: “You, fathers, do not be irritating your children, but go on bringing them up in the discipline and authoritative advice of Jehovah.” “You fathers, do not be exasperating your children, so that they do not become downhearted.” (Eph. 6:4; Col. 3:21, NW) If parents follow the discipline and authoritative advice of Jehovah they will not be irritating and exasperating their children and making them downhearted with a lot of nagging over immaterial matters. Do not hedge the child in by numerous, needless prohibitions, but only where it really matters. Restrain when there is real reason, but never just to show authority. When possible let them make their own choices and decisions, commending the wise ones. If they do well on an assigned task or in field service, commend them as an encouragement. Does not the Bible do this, saying, “Well done, good and faithful slave”? (Matt. 25:21, NW) Sometimes control is necessary because of time or place, not because an act is wrong in itself. For example, romping during a meeting hurts the child and others. No wrong in romping, but the timing is bad. There is a time to play, a time to romp, and a time to listen, a time to learn. So watch time and place, for the good of everyone.—Prov. 29:15.

8. What variety of forms may discipline take, and how are the views of many child psychologists changing?

⁸ So in summing up on the matter of discipline, administer it in love, not in angry shouts or blows. (Prov. 15:1) Punishments may vary according to temperaments of meekness or stubbornness. You may punish by withholding a token of affection, or reward by giving such token. You may banish the unruly child from the company of the obedient, or deny its participation in a family pleasure, or withhold a favorite dessert or pastime, or at times you may have to use the literal rod to preserve the order of the home. To illustrate the need of different methods, consider this actual case. A small boy in Brooklyn had a dental appointment. Before his mother took him there a 4-year-old playmate told him that whenever she went to the dentist she kept her mouth shut. So when his mother took him he refused to open his mouth. Back at home, he got a good spanking. Next dental appointment he again refused to open up. A harder spanking followed, but still his mouth remained shut in the dental chair. But this youngster was a television fan. He was denied all access to the set. About two televisionless days later he announced he was ready to take on the dentist with an open mouth. But regarding the use of the rod, it may be noted that in the face of mounting juvenile delinquency many child psychologists are doing an about-face on spanking, many swinging back to the rod idea. Many have been forced to admit that the lessons learned at mother’s knee do not make as lasting an impression as those learned while stretched across daddy’s.

9. In the broadest sense, what is the rod of correction and how must it be wielded?

⁹ But when the Bible speaks of the rod of correction it does not necessarily mean a literal rod; in the broad sense it means parental authority. Its corrective influence may take a variety of forms. Whatever form it takes, it should always be wielded in love and mercy, never in anger or rigid justice. Never try to mete out the full measure of what the child’s conduct might justly demand. Jeremiah 10:23 has been cited, but now read what it says, along with Jer 10 verse 24 (AS): “O Jehovah, I know that the way of man is not in himself; it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps. O Jehovah, correct me, but in measure; not in thine anger, lest thou bring me to nothing.” So parents, when you correct your children let it be measured out in love and mercy, not in anger or full justice. As Christians you are not under strict justice but divine mercy, and must show mercy to others, especially to your children, whose imperfections and blemishes are traceable in greater or less degree to you and your forebears. And in wielding the rod of parental authority, if you have more than one child avoid showing partiality, else you may make one hated by the other. Joseph’s brothers thought their father partial to Joseph, and as a result hated Joseph. The older son showed resentment when he thought his father was favoring the prodigal son. (Gen. 37:3, 4; Luke 15:25-30) If you hold one child up as an example to another, you may make the exemplary one hated by the other.

10, 11. What is so necessary, and how is it shown?

¹⁰ Parents, it is so necessary to show your children that they are loved and wanted. Recently the New York Times reported that 34 foundlings died for no reason but a lack of mother love. A book on efficiency tells of training in modern psychology now being given schoolteachers, but adds ruefully: “Although it must be admitted that the old-fashioned school marm who simply loved children may have been much more successful in helping her pupils.” Look magazine recently said that all rules and “techniques for handling children mean far less than the general spirit and atmosphere of the home.” The new-world-society atmosphere highlighting love and Jehovah’s spirit is essential in rearing children for life eternal.

¹¹ Parents, this love is not shown by gushing sentimentality or baby talk or indulging every childish whim or acceding to every material want. Love is not pampering. It makes the child feel wanted. Children are spoken of as an inheritance from Jehovah, likened to tender olive plants around the table. They need tender care to grow up and bear fruit. They are the fruit of the mother’s womb. Jehovah’s Word tells us the fruit of our lips should praise him, and the fruit of the womb should do likewise. (Ps. 127:3; 128:3; Heb. 13:15) Do your children praise Jehovah? If you will, they usually will. Help them, show them the way, direct their steps, give good instruction, set right examples, correct when necessary, and guide them to eternal living with the New World society. Be examples they can have pride in claiming and find happiness in following. As Manoah prayed for guidance from Jehovah in rearing Samson, you pray for his guidance in rearing your children.—Prov. 17:6; 20:7, AT; Judg. 13:8.

A WORD TO THE CHILDREN

12. What may children now be thinking, and why can we properly look to animal examples for instruction?

¹² Well now, what are all you children thinking? That here is a big crowd of grownups ganging up on you, thinking up more ways to hem you in and make your life miserable? No, we are not ganging up on you, but ganging up for you, to be strong to protect you, to keep you in our midst, serving God and safe from Satan. All who love Jehovah must gang together to help one another do God’s work. If you children have been the subjects of our discussion, it is because you are the objects of our affection. All right, you say, but if you grownups are so fond of us what is all this talk about discipline, and especially spanking? Well, with you children that does touch a tender spot, does it not? But to help us get to the bottom of the matter let us look at the animals that you children love. Jehovah’s wisdom is reflected in his creations, so to look to animals for instruction is not to lower our thinking to their level, but to lift it to God’s thoughts. We are told to go to the ant to learn industriousness, to consider the locust for an example of unity; so we are on no unscriptural side trip when we look at the training some animals give their young, which springs from God-given instinct.—Rom. 1:20; Prov. 6:6-8; 30:27; Joel 2:7, 8.

13. What examples show training should be gradual, recognizing the limitations of the young?

¹³ When animal parents train their young they are aware of the limitations of their young, that at the start the little ones cannot do big things. So they start their young out in what might be called an animal kindergarten, and work up. For example, barn swallows catch insects on the wing. That is too hard for young birds, so the parent birds catch the fast-flying insects, hover near the nest or perch of the young birds, drop the insects, and the youngsters fly out and catch the slow-falling bodies. Soon they can snatch their own food out of thin air. The mother fox, after the young are weaned, brings captured mice and other food into the den. Later she leaves it at the entrance, and as the babies get bigger she leaves it farther and farther away, to teach her young to hunt for their food. Toward the end of this training the parent fox even hides the prey beneath leaves and rubbish, thus forcing the young to use the sense of smell as well as the sense of sight. In these and many other cases, as the young learn more the parents do less. So with you children. You need to be trained by your parents, and as you learn more and gain experience you will be allowed to do more and more. As you increase in ability parental control will decrease.

14. What example shows discipline when the young persist in annoying the old?

¹⁴ But what about discipline in the woods? Well, we just have to face the fact that these animal mothers are old-fashioned and seem not to have read any modern books on child psychology, because they surely do spank their young. A mother tiger was annoyed when one of her babies kept pawing at her. She tried to ignore these advances, but finally took the youngster’s whole head in her mouth, squeezed and shook it, while the startled baby whimpered. You children probably have never had your mother take your head in her mouth, but you have probably got a shaking when you have annoyed her and not stopped when told to.

15, 16. What examples show correction for restlessness and venturesomeness?

¹⁵ Did any of you children ever get in trouble for not sitting still, maybe during a meeting? You should go to the fawn, you restless ones, and consider its ways, and be wise. A mother deer will conceal its baby or fawn and instruct it to freeze motionless, and it will remain without moving for hours. Rarely do fawns disobey and move, but if they do they get a spanking from sharp mother hoofs.

¹⁶ Did you ever get a spanking for being too venturesome, for doing something in your playing that mother thought might result in your being hurt? If you did, you have company in your plight. A young koala, that is, the little bear that looks just like the toy teddy bear, was in captivity with its mother. There was a tree in the cage, and the baby would go out on small limbs where the mother could not follow. At the first opportunity she nabbed him and spanked him so hard his cries were heard a long way off. After that he stayed off the small branches.

17. What illustrates the use of discipline to preserve life?

¹⁷ Some years ago in Sequoia National Park, in the western United States, garbage was dumped in an opening in the forest and bears would come there in large numbers to eat. Once a mother bear came out of the forest with two cubs, but before she came on down to where the grown bears were eating she sent her babies up a tree. One came down, and the mother rushed over and gave it a good wallop with her paw and sent it rolling. It scurried up the tree in a hurry, and both of them stayed there till she had finished her meal and returned to the foot of the tree and signaled them down. Remember the scripture that appeared earlier in this study, where it told the parent to spank the child, that spanking would not kill it but would deliver it from the grave? Well, that is just what this mother bear was doing. She spanked the cub; that did not kill it, but it saved it from death. Had it gone down where the big bears were eating a large vicious male might have killed it.

18. Why is discipline, even spanking, so vital in the woods?

¹⁸ There is no juvenile delinquency in the animal realm, because there are no delinquent animal mothers. They do not spare the paw and spoil the young, but spank to preserve the young. They would die fighting for their young, just as your parents would die for you; yet they spank their young, just as your parents may spank you. In the woods the first mistake is often the last, and if the young animals disobeyed their mothers they would become the main course on a woodland menu and end up in another animal’s stomach. So, while it may not be pleasant for them to be spanked, it is better to be beaten than to be eaten.

19. What animalistic creature seeks to devour all lovers of Jehovah?

¹⁹ Now you children may not think so, but there is a wild, beastly creature that would like to eat you. Peter warned all of us about him, saying: “Your adversary, the Devil, walks about like a roaring lion, seeking to devour someone.” (1 Pet. 5:8, NW) That someone is you, because you love Jehovah. The Devil hates Jehovah, and would like to swallow up in the evil surroundings of his old world everyone that loves Jehovah. So just as the wild animal mothers discipline their young to keep them from being eaten, your parents discipline you to keep you from being devoured by the Devil’s world. The animal mothers train and discipline their young in accord with the instinct God gives them; your parents train and discipline you in accord with the Bible instruction God gives them.

20. What instances of juvenile delinquency does the Bible record?

²⁰ If your parents love you theocratically they will guide you in the way taken by young Samuel, Jeremiah, Timothy and Jesus. They will steer you away from bad examples, such as the wicked boys that came with the mob at Sodom to attack God’s angels and commit immoral acts. (Gen. 19:4, 5) Your parents will guide you away from false worship, so you will not be like the children of Israel that provoked Jehovah to anger, as he said: “The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.” (Jer. 7:18) You do not want to jeer at Jehovah’s servants, as youngsters did at Job. He said: “Yea, young children despised me; I arose, and they spake against me.” (Job 19:18) In mocking God’s servants you blaspheme him, as did the mob of children that taunted Elisha by saying, “Go up, thou bald head.” Jehovah caused bears to claw forty-two of those juvenile delinquents.—2 Ki. 2:23, 24.

21. What was the real offense of the juveniles that taunted Elisha, and what shows mere youthfulness does not save wrongdoers?

²¹ That may seem severe treatment for calling someone a baldhead, but more than disrespect was involved. It was the taunt “Go up” that called for divine vengeance. It was telling Elisha to go up as he reported Elijah did. (2 Ki. 2:11) It showed disbelief in Jehovah’s miracle in Elijah’s case, and was a taunt for Elisha to prove it by duplicating it. It could also indicate that Elisha should go up as did Elijah and in that way the community would be rid of him. It suggested that his presence was unwanted and for him to clear out of the territory. It is likely that adults were responsible for this delinquency, the childish taunting being a reflection of the adult attitude if it was not directly instigated by religiously opposed adults. At any rate, the children were punished for their blasphemy. As Proverbs 20:11 states: “Even a child is known by his doings, whether his work be pure, and whether it be right.” Youthfulness alone does not save delinquents who blaspheme, as shown by the command given Jehovah’s executional forces at Armageddon: “Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity: slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women.”—Ezek. 9:5, 6.

22. How may children view their obedience to parents?

²² You may obey your parents because they want you to. That is a good reason, but here is a better one—obey because Jehovah wants you to. He says directly to you: “Children, be obedient to your parents in union with the Lord, for this is righteous: ‘Honor your father and mother’; which is the first command with a promise: ‘That it may go well with you and you may endure a long time on the earth.’” (Eph. 6:1-3, NW) Young animals must obey to live long; here Jehovah tells you to obey if you want to endure on earth. Do you love Jehovah? Then obey him. (1 John 5:3) He says, Obey “parents in union with the Lord”; so obey yours who are Jehovah’s witnesses. If it is sometimes hard to do, do it anyway, but look at it as obedience to Jehovah. God tells the wife to be obedient to her husband and the slave to be obedient to his master. How should the wife and the slave view this obedience to the husband and the master? The wife is told to do it “as to the Lord.” The slave is told to do it “as to the Christ.” You children, obey your parents “as to Jehovah,” working at it whole-souled for his sake. (Eph. 5:22; 6:5-8; Col. 3:23, 24, NW) So in this also you are serving Jehovah, just as when you go out in the witness work. Heeding reproof and discipline means life, whereas those “disobedient to parents” are “worthy of death.”—Prov. 15:10; 29:1, AT; Rom. 1:30, 32.

CHOOSING JEHOVAH’S WAY

23. What texts clinch the truth that parents are obligated to teach their children?

²³ Jehovah’s way is for parents to be guided by his Word, and children to be trained by such parents. Do not the following texts clinch that truth? “We will not conceal it from their children, telling to the coming generation the praises of the Lord, and his might and his wonders which he wrought, when he established a decree in Jacob, and gave Israel a law, which he commanded our fathers to teach unto their children, that the coming generation should know, that children yet unborn should arise, and tell to their children, that they should set their trust in God, and not forget the works of God; but keep his commands.” “The father to the children shall make known thy truth.” “Tell ye your children of it, and let your children tell their children, and their children another generation.” “Apply your hearts to all the words that I am speaking in warning to you today, that you may command your sons to take care to do all the words of this law. For it is no valueless word for you, but it means your life.”—Ps. 78:4-7, AT; Isa. 38:19; Joel 1:3; Deut. 32:46, 47, NW.

24. Why should we be unswayed by old-world methods?

²⁴ We must let Jehovah direct our steps and choose our ways. The New World society must never be swayed by old-world methods that have filled the world with rotten fruits of delinquency and crime and death. Let them babble about not inhibiting or frustrating or stunting personalities; they are utterly blinded by the silly wisdom of the dying old world if they cannot see that the sexually immoral, the thieves and murderers, the liars and blasphemers and idolaters should be frustrated. If men do not stunt and strip off the old personality of fallen flesh and don the new personality of godliness, they and their personalities will be annihilated at Armageddon. (Eph. 4:22-24; Col. 3:5-10, NW) It is better to be frustrated and alive than uninhibited and dead. Those of the New World society must now be frustrating and inhibiting and outgrowing the inborn evil within them. It would be suicidal for us to be drawn into the paths of the old world, its ways, its steps. As soon as they come staggering out of one mess they go reeling into another. At Armageddon they will walk into a mess they will never walk out of. Then the wayward ways chosen by men all come to a dead end.

25. What do we say as to the old world and rearing children?

²⁵ And as far as rearing its children is concerned, this old world has made a miserable failure. It reaps the rotten harvest of delinquency sown by its modern methods contrary to God. Yet let the old world have its way with its children, but let it keep its hands off the children of the New World society! Let worldlings choose their own way and direct their own steps. Their way ends in death, their self-directed steps lead to the yawning grave; and en route to death and the grave their way is littered with unspeakably shocking degradation and delinquency. We want none of their ways, none of their steps, none of their degradations, none of their delinquencies, and none of their share of death and none of their space in the grave! No, none of this for our new-world-society children!

26. What do we say concerning our own children and their training?

²⁶ For our children we want right ways, which means Jehovah’s ways; right steps, which means Jehovah’s steps; and en route to the new world we want their way marked by moral uprightness instead of degraded misconduct, and by works of praise instead of misdeeds of delinquency. And in the midst of mounting godlessness we do not just helplessly sit by and wring our hands and chew our nails and worry and wishfully hope our children do not get sunk in the sordid seas of the old world. We keep them sailing along with the New World society by giving good instruction, by setting right examples, by administering necessary discipline. Let the worldly wiseacres say that if we discipline our children we hate them. Their undisciplined children will die with them at Armageddon, but our disciplined ones will live with us forever in Jehovah’s New World society. So who are the real haters of their children, and who are the real lovers of children? Who guide theirs to death, and who lead theirs to life? Why train our children in the ways of the old world just so they can die with it? We will train them in the ways of the New World society so they can survive with it forever. Forget the way that seems right to men; learn the way that is right to God. What do we care if the way that is right to God seems wrong to men? Whom are we trying to please, God or men? Jehovah God, first, last and always!

27. So what do we conclude?

²⁷ You parents know what you must do. You children know what you must do. Jehovah knows what he will do. If we obey him, he will do things for us. If we disobey him, he will do things to us. Remember, the meek will inherit the earth; the rebellious will return to the earth. Let us try to inhabit it, not return to it. This is the day of decision. We must make our decision, the old world must make its, and eternal destiny hangs in the balance. So in conclusion we say: If it seems bad in their eyes to choose Jehovah’s way, let them choose in this day of Jehovah whose direction they will take and whose way they will choose; but as for us and all the new-world-society household, we will make Jehovah our God the director of our steps and the chooser of our ways, all to the eternal good of the thousands of children in our midst, and the thousands more who will yet be among us before Armageddon strikes, and the multitudes that will yet be born to the other sheep in the endless new world now at hand! May Jehovah help all parents in the New World society rear their children for the New World society.

Questions From Readers

Is it permissible to cross plants or animals to get hybrids, in view of the Genesis decree that each kind should bring forth after its kind?—F. B., United States.

When Jehovah God created plant life he decreed that it should by shoot or seed reproduce “according to its kind.” When he created the great variety of water creatures they were ordained to propagate themselves “according to their kinds,” and also “every winged flying creature according to its kind.” (Gen. 1:11, 12, 21, NW) The primary requisite in this discussion is the definition of “kind” as the Bible uses it. On pages 112 and 113 of “Make Sure of All Things” a Scriptural definition is given, as follows: “A family or group of living creatures or things that are interfertile among themselves, but not fertile with others outside their family. (That is, whose sex cells will unite to form, or begin to form, an offspring; but with those of another ‘kind’ or family are absolutely incompatible and unable to unite.)” This definition is the same as the old definition once given to “species.” Then “species” was used to mean the offspring of a single specially created pair. But with the advent of the false theory of evolution “species” has changed meaning and according to present-day scientific usage numerous species may all be of the one Biblical kind. When variations occur within the one kind evolutionists speak of some of them as new species and as evidence that species change; according to their narrowed-down definition of “species” it is true, but species do not change if we hold to the old definition of the term and which coincides with the above definition of the Biblical kind.

With this foundation laid, the question can be answered clearly. There is no prohibition against man’s developing of new varieties of plants and animals through selection or mutations or cross-breeding. Any hybrids he may be able to produce through his breeding experiments are not violations of Genesis’ decree that life reproduce according to its kind. Why not? Because if plants or animals are interfertile and produce offspring they are of the same kind; there is no stepping over the kind boundary. It is impossible to overstep this boundary, for Jehovah so created the kinds. Man cannot violate the Genesis decree concerning kinds, because two different kinds are not interfertile and no offspring could result. Through selective breeding and cross-breeding and mutations a great variety of plants or animals may be developed, but they are all within the boundary of their kind. Science is without evidence to successfully dispute this.

The Bible speaks of horses and asses and mules, all of which terms are translated from different Hebrew words. The mule is a cross between a jackass and a mare, and it is a hybrid. Only in a few rare instances have mules been reported to have had offspring. The Jews were not allowed to produce their own mules, but they were allowed to use the mule gotten from non-Jews. It was considered an excellent riding mount, even King David having one for his use. (1 Ki. 1:33, 38, 44) A census taken after the Jews’ return from Babylonian captivity showed 245 mules in their possession. So we cannot object to hybrids as unscriptural.

● What did Jesus mean when he said his followers would do greater works than he had done?—V. W., United States.

Jesus said: “Most truly I say to you, He that exercises faith in me, that one also will do the works that I do, and he will do works greater than these, because I am going my way to the Father.” (John 14:12, NW) He did not mean that the works his followers would do would be greater in miraculous power and cause more amazing demonstrations of that power. The subsequent facts show they did not do so; for instance, they performed no miracle surpassing Jesus’ raising of the four-days-dead Lazarus. (John 11:38-44) Jesus gave as the reason for saying they would do greater works the fact that he was going to the Father in heaven. That would stop his personal activity as a preacher on earth, end it, draw to a close the wonderful works he had been doing. The followers, on the other hand, would remain on earth for a long time, during which time they could do the works Jesus did and keep at it much longer than he did, accumulating more of them perhaps, and certainly extending the activity over a much greater area. Jesus had confined himself to Palestine, and for the most part had limited his activities to the Jews; but his followers would work in all nations.

Also by his departure Jesus made possible the outpouring of holy spirit on his followers, and for this reason they were able to preach in many tongues and spread the work, and make use of other gifts of the spirit in performing wonderful works. As Jesus told them at the time of his departure, “You will receive power when the holy spirit arrives upon you, and you will be witnesses of me both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the most distant part of the earth.” (Acts 1:8, NW) So by Jesus’ leaving earth his work on earth as a preacher ended, and by his leaving the holy spirit came upon his followers to empower them to carry on an expanded service, taking in all nations. So they covered a greater area and served a greater length of time than did Jesus, and in this sense they did greater works.

‘Words Fitly Spoken’

● In the coal-mining region of northeastern France are to be found, in the main, three classes of people: staunch Catholics, Communists and those who are indifferent. There, often a Catholic will tell one of Jehovah’s witnesses: “Your religion isn’t French. It comes from America,” entirely overlooking the fact that his religion is not French either, but comes from Rome.

● In one of the towns in this region a priest asked a seven-year-old witness who was standing on the street corner offering Bible literature to passers-by if he was being paid for doing this. “Why, yes,” he replied, “of course. All workers deserve a salary. Jehovah will give me eternal life in the new world. What did you think my pay would be?” The priest left without saying a word.

● In another such town a 78-year-old witness for Jehovah was visited by his Catholic priest. Said he, “I can’t understand why you have quit your religion after having been so long in it. How did you get to be so crazy at your age?” The witness replied: “You’re very much mistaken—just the opposite is the case. I was crazy among crazy folks for seventy-seven years. Since then I have been healed spiritually. Yes, at 77 years I was still calling you ‘Father,’ when I am old enough to be your grandfather.”

Announcements

ARE YOU SKILLED IN YOUR WORK?

Good, wholesome work is a joy and a pleasure. When one is skilled in his work, he does it with real delight and derives great satisfaction from doing it well. Jehovah God, the Creator of heaven and earth, is the skilled Director of all good works. Did you know there is a definite work he wants all who love him to skillfully do? It is the work of making known his great and holy name to the ends of the earth. (Ps. 83:16-18) Blessed is the one who does his bidding and is ‘skilled at his work, for he will stand in the presence of kings.’ (Prov. 22:29, AT) Desiring to please God, during February all of Jehovah’s witnesses and their companions will derive joy and pleasure from offering a year’s subscription for the Watchtower magazine at the regular rate of $1. Free to each new subscriber, there will be given three booklets. As a skilled workman of God, stand in the presence of the enthroned King, Christ Jesus, by serving Bible truths to people living in your area. Testify boldly to all whom you meet.

YEARBOOK AND CALENDAR

The 1954 Yearbook of Jehovah’s Witnesses reports that the Kingdom message was preached by 519,982 different individuals of Jehovah’s witnesses scattered throughout 143 countries, colonies and islands of the sea. Daily they praised Jehovah’s name by proclaiming the Kingdom message from house to house, calling back on interested persons, conducting home Bible studies and in other ways sharing God’s message of life with seekers for Bible truth. All together these ministers spent over 72,000,000 hours last year, under the direction of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, serving Kingdom interests. For a full and complete report of what was accomplished send 50 cents for a copy of the 1954 Yearbook. You may also obtain the 1954 calendar for 25 cents. Five or more calendars will be sent to one address at 20 cents each. Do not delay. Send your order now.

“WATCHTOWER” STUDIES

Week of February 21: Rearing Children in the New World Society, and Disciplining Children for Life, ¶1-5.

Week of February 28: Disciplining Children for Life, ¶6-27.

Check Your Memory

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

✔ Why this is no time for apathy? P. 35, ¶4.

✔ What preacher admitted that members of his faith were too prejudiced to consider Bible truth that he accepted? P. 38, ¶1.

✔ What comparison a Churches of Christ writer made between his people and Jehovah’s witnesses? P. 39, ¶1.

✔ What kind of religious famine is evident today? P. 40, ¶2.

✔ Whether Matthew’s account of the massacre of babes is just a legend? P. 43, ¶2.

✔ Why Josephus’ dates cannot be taken as discrediting the Bible? P. 44, ¶1.

✔ Why Herod Antipas went through with John’s execution? P. 45, ¶5.

✔ Whether Herod Agrippa’s devotion to Judaism was sincere? P. 46, ¶6.

✔ Which Herod accused Paul: “In a short time you would persuade me to become a Christian”? P. 47, ¶4.

✔ What indicates that modern “progressive” methods of child training have failed? P. 49, ¶5.

✔ How God’s method of child training differs from that of religious Sunday schools? P. 50, ¶8.

✔ What terrible blunder is being made by parents who do not train their pre-school children in God’s way? P. 52, ¶16.

✔ What the Scriptures say about nagging? P. 55, ¶7.

✔ What parents should remember about mercy? P. 56, ¶9.

✔ How children can tell whether their parents love them in a godly way? P. 59, ¶20.

✔ Whether it is possible for man to violate the Genesis instruction for each life form to bring forth after its kind? P. 62, ¶4.

✔ How Jesus’ followers did “works greater than” he did? P. 63, ¶3.