Lessons From the Scriptures: Lamentations 1:1–5:22

Jehovah Gives Hope Amid Sorrow

JEHOVAH is “the God who gives hope,” even amid sorrow. (Romans 15:13) This is a point made clear in the book of Lamentations, completed by Jehovah’s prophet and witness Jeremiah in 607 B.C.E. But let us highlight some of the lessons it contains.

Jerusalem’s Plight

Sin brings no joy. Look! Sinful Jerusalem, once Judah’s teeming capital, sits solitary. Judah herself is like a weeping, widowed princess because she has been devastated. Such “lovers” as Egypt did not save her from Babylonian conquest in 607 B.C.E. People no longer stream to Zion for festivals. Her children are captives, and foes laugh over her collapse. Unclean foreigners have desecrated the temple, and her people have had to give valuables for food. All of this because of sin!—1:1-11.

Jehovah is righteous in punishing wrongdoers. This is admitted as Jerusalem herself speaks. She asks if there is any sorrow like the pain that God has caused her. He sent fire that desolated the temple. The city’s sins became a yoke, and blood flowed like juice as God tread her “winepress.” Zion spread out hands in sorrow and entreaty but found no comforter, and Jehovah was righteous in punishing rebellious Jerusalem. May he deal as severely with her exulting enemies.—1:12-22.

“The Wrath of Jehovah”

Responsible ones bear guilt if they do not condemn sin. God cast Jerusalem “from heaven to earth,” allowing her destruction and that of his “footstool,” the temple. (Psalm 132:7) He thus “profaned the kingdom” of Judah. As a mere booth, the temple was destroyed by foes whose triumphant shouts were like festal cries. Dying children begged their mothers for food. But who chiefly bore guilt? False prophets who made misleading pronouncements instead of condemning Jerusalem’s sin. (Jeremiah 14:13) Prayer is fitting, for so many have died in this ‘day of Jehovah’s wrath’!—2:1-22.

Jehovah’s Mercy Endures

We should patiently hope in Jehovah. Jeremiah makes this point as he speaks representatively for the afflicted people. God hampers his prayer, and he has become the theme of his enemies’ derisive song. His hope, or “expectation from Jehovah,” seems to have perished. But he will have “a waiting attitude” because “good is Jehovah to the one hoping in him.”—3:1-27.

True repentance brings divine mercy. Convinced of this, Jeremiah urges: “Do let us return clear to Jehovah.” As with a cloud mass of anger, God has blocked approach in prayer because of the people’s sins. But Jeremiah prays: “I have called out your name, O Jehovah. . . . Do not hide your ear to my relief.” Of course, unrepentant foes will be annihilated.—3:28-66.

“Bring Us Back”

We can bring destruction upon ourselves through willful sin. Because of Judah’s sin, “precious sons of Zion” were viewed as worthless broken pottery. In the siege, those slain by the sword were better off than others dying slowly of hunger. God had, indeed, “poured out his burning anger.” Polluted prophets and priests were wandering blindly, and King Zedekiah—“the anointed one of Jehovah”—had been captured. Now God would turn his attention to sinful Edom.—4:1-22.

Jehovah alone gives true hope amid sorrow. Jeremiah realized this, for he pleaded: “Remember, O Jehovah, what has happened to us.” ‘Foreigners occupy our houses. We bear the consequences of our forefathers’ error, and mere boys carry firewood in forced labor.’ Yet, Jeremiah hopes for mercy, praying: “Bring us back, O Jehovah, to yourself, and we shall readily come back.”—5:1-22.

Reflect, then, on these lessons taught in Lamentations: Sin does not bring joy, God is righteous in punishing sinners, and responsible ones are guilty if they do not condemn wrongdoing. We should patiently hope in Jehovah, confident that divine mercy comes because of true repentance, whereas we can bring destruction upon ourselves through willful sin. This inspired book also convinces us that Jehovah alone gives true hope amid sorrow.

BIBLE TEXTS EXAMINED

· 1:15—‘Jehovah had trodden the very winepress belonging to the virgin daughter of Judah’ because he had decreed and allowed what happened. “The virgin daughter of Judah” was Jerusalem, thought to be like an inviolate woman. When the Babylonians destroyed that capital city of Judah in 607 B.C.E., there was great bloodshed, comparable to the squeezing of juice from grapes in a winepress. Jehovah will see to it that Christendom, antitypical Jerusalem, is similarly crushed.

· 2:6—God’s “booth” was the temple in Jerusalem. When that sanctuary was devastated by the Babylonians, he was allowing it to be ‘treated violently,’ like a mere hut in a garden. Such a temporary shelter from the hot sun is torn down.

· 3:16—One calamity that Jehovah allowed to come upon unfaithful Jerusalem as a consequence of the city’s fall to the Babylonians is described in the words, “With gravel he makes my teeth get broken.” Apparently, when the Israelites were on their way into exile, they had to bake bread in pits dug in the ground. Therefore, the bread came to contain grit, and a person eating such bread could break off part of his teeth.

· 4:3—The cruelty of mothers toward their children is here contrasted with the maternal care provided by jackals. Though jackals may be considered savage beasts, even they ‘present the udder and suckle their cubs.’ Because of great food shortages in besieged Jerusalem, famished Jewish women became cruel in that they had no milk to give their offspring and actually ate their own children to stay alive. (Lamentations 2:20) Thus, the women also became like ostriches that lay their eggs and abandon them.

· 5:7—The Jews of Jeremiah’s day had to bear the errors of their forefathers, but this does not mean that Jehovah directly punishes children for the sins of their parents. Actually, the bad consequences of wrongdoing are felt by later generations. (Jeremiah 31:29, 30) We therefore do well to remember that we must personally render an account to God.—Romans 14:12.

How to Endure the Loss of Loved Ones

DEATH strikes suddenly. Someone you have dearly loved for years may have just died. The shock of the loss may seem more than you can bear. Grief may take hold, causing loss of sleep, loneliness and sorrow. Tears may seem to flow unrestrained from your eyes. The loss you feel may be the severest emotional experience of your life. How can you endure it? Where can you turn for encouragement and help? How can you cope with this most trying situation?

Do not think that it is evidence of weakness to break down and cry. There is an emotional release in letting the tears flow. The Bible tells us that Abraham cried, and he was a man of great faith. When his dear wife Sarah died, “Abraham came in to bewail Sarah and to weep over her.” (Gen. 23:2) His grandson Jacob grieved over the loss of his son Joseph. (Gen. 37:35) Even Jesus Christ gave way to tears. (John 11:32-35) Letting tears flow is a normal release for heartache. But, of course, it should not be something that is allowed to continue uncontrolled indefinitely.

Grieving persons need to avoid the temptation to sit and brood over their loss. Brooding does not correct or improve matters, neither does feeling sorry for oneself accomplish anything. Instead, it feeds the emotions that keep one feeling depressed. How much better it would be to engage in some productive physical and mental activity. Activity that demands the attention of the mind, and keeping busy doing things that shift the strain, bring a measure of relief.

Many persons keep the emotional wound open and irritated by trying to live in a world of memories. Some do this by keeping a home for many years just as it was when their loved one was alive, refusing to make any changes that at other times would have been quite normal. It is a vain attempt to live in the past. But all that this does is prolong the grief. How much better it would be for such persons to realize that much more happiness can be theirs if they would enjoy the present and live for the future. Continuing with life as normally as possible is a way of enduring the loss of a loved one and avoiding a state of abnormal grief. The natural process of healing is aided when the individual returns to his former pursuits and responsibilities.

Perhaps the greatest barrier to enduring the grief associated with the loss of a loved one is the tendency to dwell upon what a person lost by such death. Thinking about how lonely he is now and the things he must now do that his loved one formerly had done for him makes his grief difficult to bear. But by getting his mind off himself and on what he can do for others, he will find that his emotional wound can heal and the gap in his life can gradually be filled. There is much that a person can do to make his life worth while if he will think of other people, having a love for them as he would like them to have for him.

The Best Remedy

Without question the best encouragement that can be given to bereaved persons is from God’s Word. The Bible gives the most satisfying answer to the question, “Why do men die, and what hope is there for the dead?” In this way Bible truth helps to lessen the sorrow and grief. It gives hope, and hope aids the mourner to keep from losing control of himself. Such Bible knowledge removes the apprehension one might feel from not knowing what has become of his loved one. Through the pages of the Bible the Creator enlightens one as to what hope there is for the dead to have life once again.—Acts 24:15; John 5:28, 29.

Because of the wonderful hope of the resurrection, a Christian is not overwhelmed with tears and grief. His sorrow is not as great or as deep as that upon those who have no knowledge of the hope the Bible gives. Notice what the apostle Paul says about this: “Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant concerning those who are sleeping in death; that you may not sorrow just as the rest also do who have no hope. For if our faith is that Jesus died and rose again, so, too, those who have fallen asleep in death through Jesus God will bring with him. For this is what we tell you by Jehovah’s word . . . Consequently keep comforting one another with these words.”—1 Thess. 4:13-15, 18.

Those who mourn the death of loved ones can find strength in God by turning to him in prayer. God can supply the curative comfort that is needed. Going to God, along with seeking to learn and to do his will, will certainly bring healing to the aching heart.—Ps. 86:6, 7.

Many persons have heard about the free home Bible study activity of Jehovah’s witnesses and have sought this assistance in time of sorrow. One such person writes: “Having recently had a heavy bereavement in the family, I am interested in knowing if this life is all there is.” Needless to say, Jehovah’s witnesses, with the aid of the Bible, consider it a privilege to help all such individuals to understand the reason for death, the condition of the dead, and the hope for the dead, by means of a resurrection, to live in an earth-wide paradise.

Thus, while the death of someone you have loved may be the worst emotional experience of your life, it can be endured. Keep busy in wholesome physical activity. Go to God in prayer. Study his Word, the Bible, to learn the reason why people die and the hope for the dead. In your distress and sorrow, please remember that Jehovah’s witnesses are most happy to help you. Why not accept their sincere offer of help the next time they call at your home, or, instead of waiting for them to call at your home, why not visit with them at their Kingdom Hall. You will be most welcome.

Outstanding Gifts That Reveal the God of Love

Outstanding Gifts That Reveal the God of Love

HOW do we know that God is good? Why could not the Almighty God just as well be bad, or at least have some bad in him? How do we know he has an altogether benevolent attitude and purpose toward humankind?

2 These are questions that might run through a person’s mind when he considers the psalmist’s statement: “Good and upright is Jehovah,” and Jesus’ words: “Nobody is good, except one, God.”—Psalm 25:8; Mark 10:18.

3 For God to be good, he certainly must be a God who cares about his creation, every part of it. First, he would be a God who makes arrangements for its subsistence.

4 Second, if God is good he must supply more than the mere physical things his creation needs just to keep living. This would be particularly so in the case of humanity, for humans want more out of life than mere existence. God’s intelligent creatures obviously are not made to carry on a drab, monotonous life. So God must provide arrangements for feeding the mind through the five senses. People use these senses for more than keeping alive. They possess the ability to appreciate and enjoy their surroundings. People, in fact, feel pity for a person who is deprived of his sight, hearing or senses of smell and taste, because he is missing pleasures that add to the zest of living.

5 Man’s home the earth, should, accordingly, have the things that make life joyous. Is this what the facts show?

THINGS THAT DELIGHT US

6 Consider the miracle of a fruit tree. Such trees are literally fruit “factories.” Their boughs are burdened with an amazing crop of their nutritious products. And these fruit “factories” operate quietly and without pollution, smoke, radiation or disturbance. As they produce food, they are at the same time a delight to the eye. It is a pleasure to stroll through an orchard. The trees provide cooling shade, as well as refreshment for the atmosphere, giving off oxygen and, often, exhilarating fragrance.

7 In addition, their fruit is more than mere sustenance. It is delicious, a joy to eat, as is all food that God has provided. What human could ever conceive of or invent the flavor of a peach, an orange, a cherry, an apple, a banana or a mango? At best man can make only poor imitations.

8 Music is another wonderful gift. It can calm the spirit. It can lift one to the heights of ecstasy. It can cause one to meditate soberly or seriously. It can spur one to action. Certain musical strains recall memories of pleasant places and events.

9 Who can explain exactly why music should have such marked effects on the human mind and heart? That we are able to respond to music, that we have a built-in sense of rhythm and sound distinction so that we can enjoy it, is really an integral gift put into our bodies by a Creator who appreciates beautiful things. Furthermore, those with the talent to produce good music—what pleasure they derive out of this gift of God, being able to entertain their fellowman!

10 The ability to carry on conversation is one of the most delightful gifts. How terrible it would be if we could not communicate, or if we had only writing, sign language or grunts and growls. The human mind can express itself and find response in conversation more than, for example, in the printed page. Yet, reading and writing are gifts that are also sources of enjoyment.

11 Then there are gorgeous displays of color throughout creation: The beauteous and endless variety of flowers, the marvelous sunsets that no artist can duplicate, besides innumerable other lovely things on earth in the greatest variety. These hundreds of delights are loving gifts for the most pleasurable use of the senses that we were kindly given.

12 Still, some who doubt creation may object. They may say, for example, that the fragrance and color of flowers are only for the purpose of filling a necessity, for they attract insects that pollinate the plants. That is no doubt partly true. But if that is the only reason for the existence of these outstanding gifts, why is it that they are also a source of human delight? Why do they promote peace of mind and a feeling of well-being in us? And who can name a purely functional reason for beautiful sunsets? Who can say that music is an essential for maintaining existence, and not a pleasure-producing gift?

13 The fact that many functional things in life are at the same time the source of great comfort and pleasure speaks well of the amazing economy of God, his diverse wisdom and his love for his creatures.

GIFTS THAT WE MAY FAIL TO APPRECIATE

14 Sometimes we view things that do not appear beautiful to us as unworthy of consideration. This is particularly true of insects, which we may be prone to look upon as “pests.” But here again the Creator has done something fine for us. Some of these very things that we despise are actually a provision saving us endless hours of drudgery so that we can have time to enjoy the finer things.

15 Consider, for example, the earthworm. These, little creatures are absolutely harmless. They sometimes number more than two million in one acre of ground. They work incessantly. They move from about seven to as much as eighteen tons (6 to 16 metric tons) of soil per acre (.4 hectare) each year, burrowing to depths of eight feet (2.4 meters) below the surface. Their bodies digest organic matter in the soil, providing a rich source of calcium, magnesium, potassium, phosphorus and nitrates, essential for healthy plant growth. They help to maintain the balance of alkalinity and acidity in the soil. Their burrowing activities bring about aeration and irrigation of the soil and reduce putrefaction. They drag leaves and other vegetation below ground for the enrichment of the soil.

16 Now, if it were not for the earthworm, it would be up to man to perform all this work. But alas, it would be impossible for the farmer, working day and night, to prepare his land for crops as does the earthworm. And the cost would be far more than the farmer could bear. So just as the fruit trees and vegetation produce for mankind with little or no effort on his part, so does the earthworm. In addition, there is the great army of insects, performing many dull, monotonous chores, releasing man for more intellectual, more pleasurable pursuits.

17 Regarding the services rendered to mankind by insects, Carl D. Duncan, Professor of Entomology and Botany, San Jose State College, said:

18 “It is not too much to say that insects determine the character of man’s world to a far greater extent than he does himself, and that if they were suddenly to disappear completely the world would be changed so extensively that it is extremely doubtful that man would be able to maintain any sort of organized society whatever.”

WHAT ABOUT “PESTS”?

19 Professor Duncan also cited another scientist, Dr. Frank Lutz, as estimating that not more than one half of one percent of all the insects in the United States can be termed “pests.”

20 In considering the problem of “pests,” it must be acknowledged that man has brought about an imbalance. His filthiness and pollution have played their part in upsetting the ecology. Sometimes man’s killing off certain insects or animals causes an abnormal increase in others. Then, efforts to control such an increase by poisons result in killing the majority, but leaving poison-resistant ones among them to multiply and “take over” the population. This poses a bigger problem, such as the so-called “super rat,” which only very strong and dangerous poisons can kill. Similar problems have been encountered with certain insects and disease bacteria.

21 When the so-called “pests” are abnormally increased, they leave their proper habitat and overflow into man’s personal domain. They invade and destroy man’s food supplies and befoul his property. They spread disease, not usually on their own part, but by carrying disease organisms from garbage and sewage. This is especially apparent in big cities, where piles of garbage carelessly thrown about attract and cause multiplication of flies, as well as rats, and now, the “super rats.”

22 But even these lowly creatures perform a service by reason of becoming “pests.” Not only do they clean up some of the garbage, but their presence forces man to take some action to keep his surroundings cleaner so that the “pests” will not come around to make his life miserable. In this way there is some curb to man’s carelessness, laziness and uncleanness.

23 The natural “sanitation squad,” made up of insects, microorganisms and larger animals, has done other things that man would never have been able to accomplish. These scavengers work to clear the forest floor of the debris of dead branches and trees. They dispose of the carcasses of dead animals. They thus prevent many devastating forest fires and much pollution and disease.

WHY WE CAN BE HAPPY DESPITE CAUSES FOR GRIEF

24 All these gifts from God, and many more too numerous to list, lighten man’s burden. They also protect him from diseases and give him pleasure. Hence, they are evidences that God is truly good and is for this reason “the happy God.” (1 Timothy 1:11) God enjoys life, and his purpose in creation is to share that joy with others. (Revelation 4:11) But can we really be happy in this present system of things, enjoying the life that we have?

25 In this upset system of things we have sorrows from time to time. But when we understand God’s good purposes toward us we can, in the overall sense, be happy.

26 For example, death may come in a family. It does indeed bring sorrow, for death is an enemy. (1 Corinthians 15:26) But those who believe in God and his goodness will not be overwhelmed by grief. On this point the apostle Paul wrote: “Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant concerning those who are sleeping in death; that you may not sorrow just as the rest also do who have no hope.” Then Paul spoke comfortingly about the resurrection.—1 Thessalonians 4:13.

27 We may tend, however, to let sorrows completely destroy our happiness. But in this Jehovah God gives us the greatest example. Think about the greatest expression of his goodness when he sent his Son to earth as a man, to die for us. This was something far beyond normal. It was entirely undeserved kindness on Jehovah’s part. The apostle calls our attention to the extent of this loving act, saying: “God recommends his own love to us in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” (Romans 5:8) Do you think that this did not cause God grief? What can be more distressful to a father than seeing his own beloved son die? Yet God also gained great happiness in observing his Son’s obedience and faithfulness, and his willingness to die for humankind. God was also happy in contemplating the benefits that this sacrifice would bring to us despite the distress it caused to Him and to his Son. (Isaiah 53:10, 12) Indeed, the gift of God’s own Son is the greatest expression of love of all!

28 And have you considered the sorrow to Jehovah’s heart when he sees humankind, his creation, in distress because they have rejected and disobeyed his laws? When men did bad and brought great distress upon themselves and upon God’s servants dwelling among them, God “felt hurt at his heart.”—Genesis 6:6.

JESUS, AN EXAMPLE OF HAPPINESS THROUGH SUFFERING

29 Jesus Christ, when on earth, reflected perfectly his Father’s personality and way of doing things. Jesus said: “He that has seen me has seen the Father also.” (John 14:9) Therefore, men do not have to see God with their literal eyes to understand him. Did Jesus have times of sorrow? He was prophetically spoken of as “a man meant for pains,” and “he was despised, and we held him as of no account.” Nonetheless, he was happy in what he was accomplishing. The same prophecy says: “Because of the trouble of his soul he will see, he will be satisfied . . . [he] will bring a righteous standing to many people.”—Isaiah 53:3, 11.

30 Jesus was often saddened that the people of Israel, who should have known God, were alienated from God by man-made religious traditions. He was “grieved at the insensibility of their hearts.” (Mark 3:5) He felt pity for the crowds because “they were skinned and thrown about like sheep without a shepherd.” (Matthew 9:36) Doubtless this brought sorrow to him. When he went to the tomb of his friend Lazarus, who, had just died, “Jesus gave way to tears.”—John 11:35.

31 So, just as we have, Jesus had occasions for sorrow. But did he let this destroy his happiness in knowing he was doing the work of his Father? Did he not exhibit joy in the disciples whom he taught and associated with for three years? There is no evidence that he went about with a mournful, negative spirit toward them or in their presence. Neither did he weaken or waver in faith or action. He knew that “in his hand what is the delight of Jehovah [would] succeed,” and that he would receive from his Father “the keys of death and of Hades” and in time would therewith undo all the harm that sin and death bring about.—Isaiah 53:10; Revelation 1:18; 20:13.

32 All these things give us a glimpse of the goodness of God. It moves our hearts to imitate him. And the wonderful thing about imitating him is that we can undergo grief in this present time and yet be happy. Moreover, by our obedience to him we can bring gladness to Jehovah himself. (Psalm 149:4; Proverbs 27:11) We can also know that there is a life to come when “neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore.”—Revelation 21

Offering the Comfort of a Future Paradise

“MOREOVER, brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant concerning those who are sleeping in death; that you may not sorrow just as the rest also do who have no hope.” So wrote the apostle Paul. After giving assurance concerning the resurrection hope, he concluded: “Consequently keep comforting one another with these words.” (1 Thess. 4:13, 18) Offering comfort is what a speaker at a funeral service basically wants to do. But it is also what all of us can do for others who sorrow because a loved one has died. What, then, can we offer in the way of comfort?

Sorrow is a very natural human reaction. There are numerous examples in the Bible of God’s servants who showed sorrow at the loss of loved ones. For example, the Scriptures tell us that “Joseph fell upon the face of his [deceased] father and burst into tears over him and kissed him.” (Gen. 50:1) Also, the sons of Israel “proceeded to weep for Moses on the desert plains of Moab thirty days” following his death. (Deut. 34:8) Helping us to understand that sorrow is no sign of imperfection, John 11:35 says that the perfect man Jesus “gave way to tears” in connection with the death of his friend Lazarus.

True Christians properly sorrow when relatives, friends or neighbors die. They will miss these deceased ones for whom they had affection. (John 11:36) But because of Christians’ Bible-based hope, they do “not sorrow just as the rest also do who have no hope.” That is, they do not give in to unlimited grief and extreme displays of emotion as sometimes is the case with persons who do not have accurate knowledge about death and resurrection. Nevertheless, Christians should be sincerely interested in caring for the dead in a dignified way and in offering comfort to survivors.

One means of doing so is in connection with the funeral itself. If a request is made, the body of overseers in a congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses can arrange for a capable speaker to deliver a funeral talk, at a location such as the funeral home, or the gravesite before burial. There is no charge for this comforting service. And it is comforting, since the speaker arranged for through the congregation will be one knowledgeable about God’s Word. He will be someone fully conscious of the seriousness of the occasion, a man capable not only of offering comfort to those who have suffered loss but also of building up spiritually those in attendance. This is done by explaining the marvelous hope the Bible gives, in short, the hope of a future earthly paradise in which both the living survivors and the resurrected dead can have a share.

Funeral services conducted by Jehovah’s Witnesses may begin with a song if desired. That is particularly so at memorial services held at Kingdom Halls. Among songs in their songbook often used are those entitled: “The Resurrection Joy” (Number 53, based on John 11; 20:18; Revelation 20:13), “Throw Your Burden on Jehovah!” (Number 87, drawn from Psalm 55), “Balsam in Gilead” (Number 97, employing Jeremiah 8:22) and “The Resurrection—God’s Loving Provision” (Number 98, based on Jesus’ words at John 5:28, 29).

Often the speaker will include some words about the deceased person. It may well be that while alive he had been exemplary in his Christian devotion, had successfully met various trials through applying Bible principles or in other ways had shown that he desired to make a good name with God. (Eccl. 7:1) Those attending such a funeral may find such warm remarks comforting and also helpful as they strive to lead Christian lives.

The speaker will likely bring in as well the Bible-based hope for the dead that the deceased knew of, if he or she had been a true Christian. Also there might be some tasteful remarks to the effect that because all of us are sinners, including the deceased, death is inevitable in the present system. It is the common heritage of all.—Rom. 5:12; 6:23.

The speaker does not foster among the survivors the false hope that they can in any way help their loved one by paying for Masses or something of the sort. No amount of ceremony will bring the dead back nor change that one’s standing before God. (See 2 Samuel 12:19-23.) But what a comfort to know that the dead are unconscious, not undergoing torment or suffering! And to know that the future of a dead loved one is in the hands of a just and loving God, who has made a resurrection provision, is a comfort itself.—Eccl. 9:5, 10; Deut. 32:4.

A scripture quoted in the funeral discourse given in Ohlsdorf is the one found at Psalm 90:10, which says: “In themselves the days of our years are seventy years; and if because of special mightiness they are eighty years, yet their insistence is on trouble and hurtful things.” Statistics back up the Bible. According to The World Almanac (1979), human life-expectancy rates range from between 30 and 40 years in such countries as Bangladesh, Benin, Chad and Mali to a high of just over 70 (but well below 80) in Iceland, Japan, the Netherlands and a few other countries.

Accordingly, some might liken their “life account” to a bank account, at birth credited with about 25,600 days. When young, this might sound like a great deal of time. Still, at best, when a person is 25 about a third of his days have been used up, like money spent. Like a dwindling bank account the remaining time of life lessens with every passing day. At 35 one’s life at best is almost half over. But even at that, just as a sudden recession or an unexpected turn of events can wipe out a person’s bank account, unexpected circumstances can suddenly deplete a person’s “life account.” Is this the purpose or scheme of life, for one’s days to be spent in this way, all the while being full of “trouble and hurtful things”? The death of a loved one often gets survivors thinking about this serious matter.—Eccl. 7:2.

Still, it is possible to offer comfort to mourning ones. You can point out that man’s Creator lives a purposeful life, and forever. If, as the Bible says, man was created in His likeness, why should man’s life then be so short? (Gen. 1:27) This seems hard to harmonize with the God of love we learn about in the Bible, a God so obviously interested in the happiness and contentment of his creatures. But what a comforting relief it can be to learn and accept from the Bible that God can undo death!

The Scriptures assure true Christians that they are serving the God “who makes the dead alive.” (Rom. 4:17) Jehovah God promises to do away with death by emptying mankind’s common grave of the dead, returning them to life in an earthly paradise. With such a hope, no wonder God’s servants do “not sorrow just as the rest also do who have no hope.”—1 Thess. 4:13.

Looking Ahead to Paradise

In a funeral talk or even when you personally comfort a bereaved person, often attention may be called to God’s original purpose for the earth. That purpose was for the paradisaic garden of Eden to be extended to cover the entire globe. (Gen. 1:28) We can trust that God’s purpose cannot, no, will not, be thwarted. True, in his wisdom he permitted imperfection to continue among humans until his Son would come to earth and offer a ransom sacrifice, and until the heavenly kingdom would be established. But we can be absolutely confident that a paradise will be restored earth wide. So the dead who come forth in the future earthly resurrection actually will be in line to experience a life far better—more peaceful and rewarding—than that before their death. What a comfort can be that assurance backed up by God’s Word!

It was with these thoughts still running through my mind that I bade farewell to the bereaved relatives and acquaintances of my friend’s deceased mother. Leaving the beautiful parklike paradise of Ohlsdorf, I had to rejoice in the hope of the other kind of paradise just ahead—an earthly paradise for the living, but one in which even the dead will be able to share.

BAPTISM

BAPTISM
The Greek ba´pti·sma refers to the process of immersion, including submersion and emergence; it is derived from the verb ba´pto, meaning “dip.” (Joh 13:26) In the Bible, “to baptize” is the same as “to immerse.” In illustration of this, The Holy Bible, An Improved Edition, renders Romans 6:3, 4 as follows: “Or, are ye ignorant, that all we who were baptized (immersed) into Christ Jesus were baptized (immersed) into his death? We were buried therefore with him through our baptism (immersion) into his death.” (See also Ro; ED.) The Greek Septuagint uses a form of the same word for “dip” at Exodus 12:22 and Leviticus 4:6. (See NW ftns.) When one is immersed in water, one is temporarily “buried” out of sight and then lifted out.
We shall consider four different aspects of baptism, together with related questions: (1) John’s baptism, (2) water baptism of Jesus and his followers, (3) baptism into Christ Jesus and into his death, (4) baptism with fire.
John’s Baptism. The first human authorized by God to perform water baptism was John the son of Zechariah and Elizabeth. (Lu 1:5-7, 57) The very fact that he was known as “John the Baptist” or “the baptizer” (Mt 3:1; Mr 1:4) implies that baptism or water immersion came to the attention of the people especially through John, and the Scriptures prove that his ministry and baptism came from God; they were not of John’s origin. His works were foretold by the angel Gabriel as from God (Lu 1:13-17), and Zechariah prophesied by holy spirit that John would be a prophet of the Most High to make Jehovah’s ways ready. (Lu 1:68-79) Jesus confirmed that John’s ministry and baptism were from God. (Lu 7:26-28) The disciple Luke records that “God’s declaration came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness. So he came . . . preaching baptism.” (Lu 3:2, 3) The apostle John states of him: “There arose a man that was sent forth as a representative of God: his name was John.”—Joh 1:6.
Further understanding of the meaning of John’s baptism is gained by comparing various translations of Luke 3:3. John came “preaching baptism in symbol of repentance for forgiveness of sins” (NW); “baptism conditioned on repentance” (CB); “baptism whereby men repented, to have their sins forgiven” (Kx); “baptism in token of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (NE); “Turn away from your sins and be baptized, and God will forgive your sins” (TEV). These renderings make plain that the baptism did not wash away their sins, but the repentance and changing of their ways did, and of this, baptism was a symbol.
The baptism performed by John was therefore not a special cleansing from God through his servant John, but a public demonstration and symbol of the individual’s repentance over his sins against the Law, which was to lead them to Christ. (Ga 3:24) John thereby prepared a people to “see the saving means of God.” (Lu 3:6) His work served to “get ready for Jehovah a prepared people.” (Lu 1:16, 17) Such a work had been prophesied by Isaiah and Malachi.—Isa 40:3-5; Mal 4:5, 6.
Some scholars try to read anticipation of John’s baptism and the Christian baptism in ancient purification ceremonies under the Law (Ex 29:4; Le 8:6; 14:8, 31, 32; Heb 9:10, ftn) or in individual acts. (Ge 35:2; Ex 19:10) But these instances bear no analogy to the real meaning of baptism. They were washings for ceremonial cleanness. In only one instance is there anything approaching a dipping of the body completely under water. This is in the case of Naaman the leper, and the plunging into water was done seven times. (2Ki 5:14) It did not bring him into any special relationship with God, but it merely cured him of leprosy. Besides, Scripturally, proselytes were circumcised, not baptized. To partake of the Passover or engage in worship at the sanctuary one had to be circumcised.—Ex 12:43-49.
Neither are there any grounds for the assertion made by some that John’s baptism was probably borrowed from the Jewish sect the Essenes or from the Pharisees. Both of these sects had many requirements for ablutions to be performed often. But Jesus showed such to be mere commandments of men who overstepped the commandments of God by their tradition. (Mr 7:1-9; Lu 11:38-42) John baptized in water because, as he said, he was sent by God to baptize in water. (Joh 1:33) He was not sent by the Essenes or by the Pharisees. His commission was not to make Jewish proselytes but to baptize those who were already members of the Jewish congregation.—Lu 1:16.
John knew that his works were merely a preparing of the way before God’s Son and Messiah and would give way to the greater ministry of that One. The reason for John’s baptizing was that the Messiah might be made manifest to Israel. (Joh 1:31) According to John 3:26-30, the Messiah’s ministry would increase, but John’s ministry was to decrease. Those who were baptized by Jesus’ disciples during Jesus’ earthly ministry and who therefore also became Jesus’ disciples were baptized in symbol of repentance in the manner of John’s baptism.—Joh 3:25, 26; 4:1, 2.
Jesus’ Baptism in Water. The baptism of Jesus himself as performed by John must of necessity have had a meaning and purpose quite different from John’s baptism, as Jesus “committed no sin, nor was deception found in his mouth.” (1Pe 2:22) So he could not submit to an act symbolizing repentance. Undoubtedly it was for this reason that John objected to baptizing Jesus. But Jesus said: “Let it be, this time, for in that way it is suitable for us to carry out all that is righteous.”—Mt 3:13-15.
Luke states that Jesus was praying at the time of his baptism. (Lu 3:21) Further, the writer of the letter to the Hebrews says that when Jesus Christ came “into the world” (that is, not when he was born and could not read and say these words, but when he presented himself for baptism and began his ministry) he was saying, in accord with Psalm 40:6-8 (LXX): “Sacrifice and offering you did not want, but you prepared a body for me. . . . Look! I am come (in the roll of the book it is written about me) to do your will, O God.” (Heb 10:5-9) Jesus was by birth a member of the Jewish nation, which nation was in a national covenant with God, namely, the Law covenant. (Ex 19:5-8; Ga 4:4) Jesus, by reason of this fact, was therefore already in a covenant relationship with Jehovah God when he thus presented himself to John for baptism. Jesus was there doing something more than what was required of him under the Law. He was presenting himself to his Father Jehovah to do his Father’s “will” with reference to the offering of his own “prepared” body and with regard to doing away with animal sacrifices that were offered according to the Law. The apostle Paul comments: “By the said ‘will’ we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all time.” (Heb 10:10) The Father’s will for Jesus also involved activity in connection with the Kingdom, and for this service too Jesus presented himself. (Lu 4:43; 17:20, 21) Jehovah accepted and acknowledged this presentation of his Son, anointing him with holy spirit and saying: “You are my Son, the beloved; I have approved you.”—Mr 1:9-11; Lu 3:21-23; Mt 3:13-17.
Water Baptism of Jesus’ Followers. John’s baptism was due to be replaced by the baptism commanded by Jesus: “Make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit.” (Mt 28:19) This was the only water baptism having God’s approval from Pentecost, 33 C.E., forward. Some years after 33 C.E., Apollos, a zealous man, was teaching correctly about Jesus, but he had an understanding of only John’s baptism. On this matter he had to be corrected, as did the disciples whom Paul met at Ephesus. These men in Ephesus had undergone John’s baptism, but evidently after its valid performance had ended, since Paul’s visit to Ephesus was about 20 years after the termination of the Law covenant. They were then baptized correctly in the name of Jesus and received holy spirit.—Ac 18:24-26; 19:1-7.
That Christian baptism required an understanding of God’s Word and an intelligent decision to present oneself to do the revealed will of God was evident when, at Pentecost, 33 C.E., the Jews and proselytes there assembled, who already had a knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures, heard Peter speak about Jesus the Messiah, with the result that 3,000 “embraced his word heartily” and “were baptized.” (Ac 2:41; 3:19–4:4; 10:34-38) Those in Samaria first believed Philip’s preaching of the good news, and then they were baptized. (Ac 8:12) The Ethiopian eunuch, a devout Jewish proselyte who, as such, also had knowledge of Jehovah and the Hebrew Scriptures, heard first the explanation of the fulfillment of these scriptures in Christ, accepted it, and then wanted to be baptized. (Ac 8:34-36) Peter explained to Cornelius that “the man that fears [God] and works righteousness is acceptable” (Ac 10:35) and that everyone putting faith in Jesus Christ gets forgiveness of sins through his name. (Ac 10:43; 11:18) All of this is in harmony with Jesus’ command to “make disciples . . . teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you.” Those who accept the teaching and who become disciples properly get baptized.—Mt 28:19, 20; Ac 1:8.
At Pentecost, Jews who bore community responsibility for Jesus’ death, and who doubtless knew of John’s baptism, were “stabbed to the heart” by Peter’s preaching and asked: “Brothers, what shall we do?” Peter answered: “Repent, and let each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the free gift of the holy spirit.” (Ac 2:37, 38) Notice that Peter pointed out something new to them—that, not repentance and baptism in John’s baptism, but repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ was necessary for forgiveness of sins. He did not say that baptism itself washed away sins. Peter knew that “the blood of Jesus [God’s] Son cleanses us from all sin.” (1Jo 1:7) Later, after speaking of Jesus as “the Chief Agent of life,” Peter said to Jews at the temple: “Repent, therefore, and turn around so as to get your sins blotted out, that seasons of refreshing may come from the person of Jehovah.” (Ac 3:15, 19) Here he instructed them that repenting of their bad deed against Christ and ‘turning around,’ to recognize him, was what brought forgiveness of sin; he did not at this point mention baptism.
As for the Jews, the Law covenant was abolished on the basis of Christ’s death on the torture stake (Col 2:14), and the new covenant became operative at Pentecost, 33 C.E. (Compare Ac 2:4; Heb 2:3, 4.) Nevertheless, God extended special favor to the Jews about three and a half years longer. During this time Jesus’ disciples confined their preaching to Jews, Jewish proselytes, and Samaritans. But about 36 C.E. God directed Peter to go to the home of the Gentile Cornelius, a Roman army officer, and by pouring out His holy spirit on Cornelius and his household, showed Peter that Gentiles could now be accepted for water baptism. (Ac 10:34, 35, 44-48) Since God no longer recognized the Law covenant with the circumcised Jews but now recognized only his new covenant mediated by Jesus Christ, natural Jews, whether circumcised or uncircumcised, were not considered by God as being in any special relationship with him. They could not attain to a status with God by observing the Law, which was no longer valid, nor by John’s baptism, which had to do with the Law, but were obliged to approach God through faith in his Son and be baptized in water in the name of Jesus Christ in order to have Jehovah’s recognition and favor.—See SEVENTY WEEKS (Covenant in force “for one week”).
Consequently, after 36 C.E., all, Jews and Gentiles, have had the same standing in God’s eyes. (Ro 11:30-32; 14:12) The people of the Gentile nations, except for those who had been circumcised Jewish proselytes, were not in the Law covenant and had never been a people having a special relationship with God the Father. Now the opportunity was extended to them as individuals to become God’s people. Before they could be baptized in water they, therefore, had to come to God as believers in his Son Jesus Christ. Then, according to Christ’s example and command, they would properly submit to water baptism.—Mt 3:13-15; 28:18-20.
Such Christian baptism would have a vital effect on their standing before God. After referring to Noah’s constructing of the ark in which he and his family were preserved through the Flood, the apostle Peter wrote: “That which corresponds to this is also now saving you, namely, baptism, (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the request made to God for a good conscience,) through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” (1Pe 3:20, 21) The ark was tangible evidence that Noah had dedicated himself to do God’s will and had then faithfully done the work assigned by God. This led to his preservation. In a corresponding way, those who would dedicate themselves to Jehovah on the basis of faith in the resurrected Christ, get baptized in symbol of that, and do God’s will for his servants would be saved from the present wicked world. (Ga 1:3, 4) No longer would they be headed for destruction with the rest of the world. They would be saved from this and would be granted a good conscience by God.
No Infant Baptism. In view of the fact that ‘hearing the word,’ ‘embracing the word heartily,’ and ‘repenting’ precede water baptism (Ac 2:14, 22, 38, 41) and that baptism requires the individual to make a solemn decision, it is apparent that one must at least be of age to hear, to believe, and to make this decision. An argument is made by some in favor of infant baptism. They refer to the instances where ‘households’ were baptized, such as the households of Cornelius, Lydia, the Philippian jailer, Crispus, and Stephanas. (Ac 10:48; 11:14; 16:15, 32-34; 18:8; 1Co 1:16) They believe that this implies that small babies in those families were also baptized. But, in the case of Cornelius, those who were baptized were those who had heard the word and received the holy spirit, and they spoke in tongues and glorified God; these things could not apply to infants. (Ac 10:44-46) Lydia was “a worshiper of God, . . . and Jehovah opened her heart wide to pay attention to the things being spoken by Paul.” (Ac 16:14) The Philippian jailer had to “believe on the Lord Jesus,” and this implies that the others in his family also had to believe in order to be baptized. (Ac 16:31-34) “Crispus the presiding officer of the synagogue became a believer in the Lord, and so did all his household.” (Ac 18:8) All of this demonstrates that associated with baptism were such things as hearing, believing, and glorifying God, things infants cannot do. At Samaria when they heard and believed “the good news of the kingdom of God and of the name of Jesus Christ, they proceeded to be baptized.” Here the Scriptural record specifies that the ones baptized were, not infants, but “men and women.”—Ac 8:12.
The statement made by the apostle Paul to the Corinthians that children were “holy” by reason of a believing parent is no proof that infants were baptized; rather, it implies the opposite. Minor children too young to have the ability to make such a decision would come under a form of merit because of the believing parent, not because of any so-called sacramental baptism, imparting independent merit. If infants could properly be baptized, they would not need to have the merit of the believing parent extended to them.—1Co 7:14.
It is true that Jesus said: “Stop hindering [the young children] from coming to me, for the kingdom of the heavens belongs to suchlike ones.” (Mt 19:13-15; Mr 10:13-16) But they were not baptized. Jesus blessed them, and there is nothing to indicate that his laying his hands upon them was a religious ceremony. He further showed that the reason ‘the kingdom of God belongs to such’ was not because they were baptized but because they were teachable and trusting. Christians are commanded to be “babes as to badness,” yet “full-grown in powers of understanding.”—Mt 18:4; Lu 18:16, 17; 1Co 14:20.
The religious historian Augustus Neander wrote of the first-century Christians: “The practice of infant baptism was unknown at this period. . . . That not till so late a period as (at least certainly not earlier than) Irenaeus [c. 140-203 C.E.], a trace of infant baptism appears, and that it first became recognised as an apostolic tradition in the course of the third century, is evidence rather against than for the admission of its apostolic origin.”—History of the Planting and Training of the Christian Church by the Apostles, 1864, p. 162.
Complete Immersion. From the definition of baptism as stated earlier, it is clear that baptism is complete immersion or submersion in water, not a mere pouring or sprinkling. The Bible examples of baptism corroborate this fact. Jesus was baptized in a sizable river, the Jordan, and after being baptized he came “up out of the water.” (Mr 1:10; Mt 3:13, 16) John selected a location in the Jordan Valley near Salim to baptize, “because there was a great quantity of water there.” (Joh 3:23) The Ethiopian eunuch asked to be baptized when they came to “a body of water.” They both “went down into the water.” Afterward they came “up out of the water.” (Ac 8:36-40) All these instances imply, not a small ankle-deep pool, but a large body of water into and out of which they would have to walk. Further, the fact that baptism was also used to symbolize a burial indicates complete submersion.—Ro 6:4-6; Col 2:12.
Historical sources show that the early Christians baptized by immersion. On this subject the New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967, Vol. II, p. 56) states: “It is evident that Baptism in the early Church was by immersion.” Larousse du XXe Siècle, Paris, 1928, says: “The first Christians received baptism by immersion everywhere where water was found.”
Baptism Into Christ Jesus, Into His Death. Jesus knew at the time of his baptism in the Jordan River that he was entering upon a sacrificial course. He knew that his ‘prepared body’ must be put to death, that he must die in innocence as a perfect human sacrifice with ransoming value for mankind. (Mt 20:28) Jesus understood that he must be plunged into death but that he would be raised out of it on the third day. (Mt 16:21) So he likened his experience to a baptism into death. (Lu 12:50) He explained to his disciples that he was already undergoing this baptism during his ministry. (Mr 10:38, 39) He was baptized fully into death when he was plunged into death by being impaled on the torture stake on Nisan 14, 33 C.E. His resurrection by his Father Jehovah God on the third day completed this baptism, which includes a raising up. Jesus’ baptism into death is clearly distinct and separate from his water baptism, for he had completely undergone water baptism at the beginning of his ministry, at which time his baptism into death only began.
The faithful apostles of Jesus Christ were baptized in water by John’s baptism. (Joh 1:35-37; 4:1) But they had not yet been baptized with holy spirit when Jesus pointed out that they were also to be baptized in a symbolic baptism like his, a baptism into death. (Mr 10:39) So baptism into his death is something apart from water baptism. Paul expressed himself in his letter to the Christian congregation at Rome, saying: “Do you not know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?”—Ro 6:3.
It is Jehovah God who is responsible for the performing of such baptism into Christ Jesus as well as baptism into his death. He anointed Jesus, making him the Christ or Anointed One. (Ac 10:38) Thus God baptized Jesus with the holy spirit in order that, through Jesus, his followers might thereafter be baptized with holy spirit. Therefore, those who become joint heirs with him, with heavenly hopes, have to be “baptized into Christ Jesus,” that is, into the Anointed Jesus who, at the time of his anointing, was also begotten to be a spiritual son of God. They thereby become united to him, their Head, and they become members of the congregation that is the body of Christ.—1Co 12:12, 13, 27; Col 1:18.
The course of these Christian followers who are baptized into Christ Jesus is a course of integrity-keeping under test from the time they are baptized into Christ, a daily facing of death and finally a death of integrity, as described by the apostle Paul when he explained to the Roman Christians: “Therefore we were buried with him through our baptism into his death, in order that, just as Christ was raised up from the dead through the glory of the Father, we also should likewise walk in a newness of life. For if we have become united with him in the likeness of his death, we shall certainly also be united with him in the likeness of his resurrection.”—Ro 6:4, 5; 1Co 15:31-49.
Clarifying the matter still further, Paul, in writing to the congregation at Philippi, described his own course as “a sharing in [Christ’s] sufferings, submitting myself to a death like his, to see if I may by any means attain to the earlier resurrection from the dead.” (Php 3:10, 11) Only the Almighty God the heavenly Father, who is the Baptizer of those who are baptized in union with Jesus Christ and into his death, can complete the baptism. This He does through Christ by raising them up out of death to be united with Jesus Christ in the likeness of his resurrection, which is to heavenly, immortal life.—1Co 15:53, 54.
That a congregation of people can, so to speak, be baptized or immersed into a liberator and leader is illustrated by the apostle Paul when he describes the congregation of Israel as being “baptized into Moses by means of the cloud and of the sea.” There they were covered with a protecting cloud and with the walls of water on each side of them, being, symbolically speaking, immersed. Moses foretold that God would raise up a prophet like himself; Peter applied this prophecy to Jesus Christ.—1Co 10:1, 2; De 18:15-19; Ac 3:19-23.
What is baptism “for the purpose of being dead ones”?
The passage at 1 Corinthians 15:29 is variously rendered by translators: “What shall they do which are baptized for the dead?” (KJ); “on behalf of their dead?” (AT); “on behalf of the dead?” (NE); “for the purpose of being dead ones?” (NW)
Many different interpretations have been offered for this verse. The most common interpretation is that Paul was referring to the custom of vicarious baptism in water, that is, baptizing living persons in behalf of dead ones in a substitutionary way in order to benefit the dead. The existence of such a practice in Paul’s day cannot be proved, nor would it be in accord with those scriptures that clearly state that “disciples,” those who themselves ‘embraced the word heartily,’ those who personally “believed,” were the ones that got baptized.—Mt 28:19; Ac 2:41; 8:12.
A Greek-English Lexicon, by Liddell and Scott, includes “for,” “on behalf of,” and “for the sake of” among its definitions of the Greek preposition hy·per´, which is used with the genitive case in 1 Corinthians 15:29. (Revised by H. Jones, Oxford, 1968, p. 1857) In some settings the expression “for the sake of” is equivalent to “for the purpose of.” Already in 1728 Jacob Elsner noted cases from various Greek writers where hy·per´ with the genitive has final meaning, that is, a meaning expressive of purpose, and he showed that in 1 Corinthians 15:29 this construction has such meaning. (Observationes Sacrae in Novi Foederis Libros, Utrecht, Vol. II, pp. 127-131) Consistent with this, in this verse the New World Translation renders hy·per´ as meaning “for the purpose of.”
Where an expression can grammatically be translated in more than one way, the correct rendering is one that agrees with the context. In the context, 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4 shows that what is principally under discussion is belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The following verses then present evidence of the soundness of that belief (vss 5-11); they discuss the serious implications of denying belief in the resurrection (vss 12-19), the fact that the resurrection of Christ gives assurance that others will be raised from the dead (vss 20-23), and how all of this works toward the unification of all intelligent creation with God (vss 24-28). Verse 29 obviously is an integral part of this discussion. But whose resurrection is at issue in verse 29? Is it the resurrection of the ones whose baptism is referred to there? Or is it that of someone who died before that baptism took place? What do the following verses indicate? Verses 30 to 34 clearly show that the future life prospects of living Christians are there being discussed, and verses 35 to 58 state that those were faithful Christians who had the hope of heavenly life.
That agrees with Romans 6:3, which says: “Do you not know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?” As this scripture makes plain, that is not a baptism that a Christian undergoes on behalf of someone already dead but is, instead, something that affects the person’s own future.
In what sense, then, were those Christians “baptized for the purpose of being dead ones,” or “baptized into his death”? They were immersed into a course of life that was to lead them as integrity-keepers to death, as was the case with Christ, and with the hope of a resurrection like his to immortal spirit life. (Ro 6:4, 5; Php 3:10, 11) This was not a baptism that was accomplished quickly, as water immersion is. More than three years after his immersion in water, Jesus spoke of a baptism that was not yet completed in his own case and that was yet future for his disciples. (Mr 10:35-40) Since this baptism leads to resurrection to heavenly life, it must begin with the operation of God’s spirit on the person in such a way as to engender that hope, and it must end, not at death, but with realization of the prospect of immortal spirit life by means of the resurrection.—2Co 1:21, 22; 1Co 6:14.
A Person’s Place in God’s Purpose. It should be noted that the one being baptized in water enters a special relationship as Jehovah’s servant, to do His will. The individual does not determine what the will of God is for him, but it is God who makes the decision as to the use of the individual and the placing of such one in the framework of His purposes. For example, in times past, the entire nation of Israel was in special relationship with God; they were Jehovah’s property. (Ex 19:5) But only the tribe of Levi was selected to perform the services at the sanctuary, and out of this tribe only Aaron’s family constituted the priesthood. (Nu 1:48-51; Ex 28:1; 40:13-15) The kingship came to be established exclusively in the line of David’s family by Jehovah God.—2Sa 7:15, 16.
Likewise those who undergo Christian baptism become God’s property, his slaves, to employ as he sees fit. (1Co 6:20) An example of God’s direction of such matters is found in Revelation, where reference is made to a definite number of persons finally “sealed,” namely, 144,000. (Re 7:4-8) Even before such final approval, God’s holy spirit serves as a seal that gives those sealed a token in advance of their inheritance, a heavenly one. (Eph 1:13, 14; 2Co 5:1-5) He also told these having such a hope: “God has set the members in the body [of Christ], each one of them, just as he pleased.”—1Co 12:18, 27.
Jesus called attention to another group when he said: “I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; those also I must bring, and they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock, one shepherd.” (Joh 10:16) These are not of the “little flock” (Lu 12:32), but they too must approach Jehovah through Jesus Christ and be baptized in water.
The vision given to the apostle John, as recorded in Revelation, harmonizes with this when, after showing John the 144,000 “sealed” ones, it turns his eyes to “a great crowd, which no man was able to number.” These are shown as having “washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb,” indicating faith in the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ the Lamb of God. (Re 7:9, 14) They are therefore given favorable recognition, “standing before [God’s] throne,” but are not those whom God selects to be the “sealed” 144,000. As to this “great crowd,” the vision goes on to point out that they serve God day and night and will be protected and will be cared for by him.—Re 7:15-17.
Baptism With Fire. When many Pharisees and Sadducees came out to John the Baptizer, he called them “offspring of vipers.” He spoke of the coming One and said: “That one will baptize you people with holy spirit and with fire.” (Mt 3:7, 11; Lu 3:16) The baptism with fire is not the same as baptism with holy spirit. The fiery baptism could not be, as some say, the tongues of fire at Pentecost, for the disciples there were not immersed in fire. (Ac 2:3) John told his listeners that there would be a division, there would be a gathering of the wheat, after which the chaff would be burned up with fire that could not be put out. (Mt 3:12) He pointed out that the fire would not be a blessing or a reward but would be because ‘the tree did not produce fine fruit.’—Mt 3:10; Lu 3:9.
Using fire as a symbol of destruction, Jesus foretold the execution of the wicked to take place during his presence, saying: “On the day that Lot came out of Sodom it rained fire and sulphur from heaven and destroyed them all. The same way it will be on that day when the Son of man is to be revealed.” (Lu 17:29, 30; Mt 13:49, 50) Other instances of fire representing, not a saving force, but a destructive one, are found at 2 Thessalonians 1:8; Jude 7; and 2 Peter 3:7, 10.

FAMILY

FAMILY
The Hebrew term mish·pa·chah´ (family), in addition to referring to a household, also means, by extension, a tribe, people, or nation. The Greek word pa·tri·a´ also is broad in its scope. Jehovah God is the originator of the family arrangement. He is the Father of his heavenly family and the one to whom ‘all the families on earth owe their name.’ (Eph 3:14, 15) This is so because Jehovah established the first human family, and by this means he purposed that the earth be filled. Additionally, He permitted Adam, though a sinner, to have a family and have children “in his likeness, in his image.” (Ge 5:3) In the Bible, Jehovah has since made clear that He accords great importance to the divinely granted power of procreation, the means by which a man can carry on his name and family line in the earth.—Ge 38:8-10; De 25:5, 6, 11, 12.
Structure and Conservation of Family. In ancient Hebrew society the family was the basic unit. The family was a small government; the father as head was responsible to God, and the mother was the subordinate manager over the children in the household. (Ac 2:29; Heb 7:4) The family was, in a small way, a reflection of the grand family of God. God is represented in the Bible as a husband, with the “Jerusalem above” as the mother of his children.—Ga 4:26; compare Isa 54:5.
The family in patriarchal times may be compared in some respects to the modern corporation. There were some things owned by family members as personal. But, for the most part, the property was held in common, with the father managing its disposal. A wrong committed by a member of the family was considered as a wrong against the family itself, especially its head. It brought reproach on him, and he was responsible, as the judge of the household, to take the necessary action on the matter.—Ge 31:32, 34; Le 21:9; De 22:21; Jos 7:16-25.
Monogamy was the original standard Jehovah set for the family. Although polygamy was later practiced, polygamy was always against the original principle that God laid down. However, he tolerated it until his due time to restore his original standard, which he has done in the Christian congregation. (1Ti 3:2; Ro 7:2, 3) Under the Law covenant he recognized the existence of polygamy and regulated it so that the family unit was still kept intact and operative. But it was Jehovah himself who said: “That is why a man will leave his father and his mother and he must stick to his wife and they must become one flesh.” And it was his Son who quoted these words and went on to say: “So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has yoked together let no man put apart.” (Ge 2:24; Mt 19:4-6) The record indicates that Adam had only one wife, who became “the mother of everyone living.” (Ge 3:20) Noah’s three sons, who began the repopulation of the earth after the global Flood, were all sons of one father and one mother, and each son passed through the Flood with but one wife.—Ge 8:18; 9:1; 1Pe 3:20.
Under the Law Covenant. In giving the Ten Commandments to Israel, God gave attention to the integrity of the family unit. “Honor your father and your mother” is the fifth commandment, the first commandment with a promise. (De 5:16; Eph 6:2) A child rebellious against his parents was as one rebellious against the governmental arrangement established by God as well as against God himself. If he struck or cursed his father or mother, or if he proved to be incorrigibly unmanageable, he was to be put to death. (Ex 21:15, 17; Le 20:9; De 21:18-21) Children were to have proper fear of their parents, and a child who treated his father or mother with contempt was cursed.—Le 19:3; De 27:16.
The seventh commandment, “You must not commit adultery,” outlawed any sexual union of a married person with another outside the marriage bond. (Ex 20:14) All children were to be family born. An illegitimate son was not recognized, nor were his descendants allowed to become members of the congregation of Israel even to the tenth generation.—De 23:2.
While the seventh commandment, in forbidding adultery, served to safeguard the family unit, the tenth commandment, by forbidding wrong desires, further protected the integrity of one’s own family as well as the other man’s house and family. The things most common to family life were protected by this commandment, namely, house, wife, servants, animals, and other property.—Ex 20:17.
Under the Law a careful record of genealogies was kept. Family integrity was even more greatly emphasized by the matter of ancestral land inheritance. Genealogies were especially important in the family line of Judah and, later on, in the lineage of Judah’s descendant David. Because of the promise that the Messiah the King would come through these families, the record of family relationship was zealously guarded. And even though polygamy was not abolished by the Law, the family integrity was protected and its genealogy was kept intact by strict laws governing polygamy. In no way was looseness or promiscuity legally tolerated. Sons born of polygamy or concubinage were legitimate, full-fledged sons of the father.—See CONCUBINE.
The Law specifically prohibited marriage alliances with the seven Canaanite nations that were to be ousted from the land. (De 7:1-4) Because of failing to observe this command, the nation of Israel was ensnared in the worship of false gods and finally brought into captivity by their enemies. Solomon is an outstanding example of one who sinned in this respect. (Ne 13:26) Ezra and Nehemiah undertook energetic reforms among those of the repatriated Israelites who were contaminating their families and Israel itself by marriage to foreign wives.—Ezr 9:1, 2; 10:11; Ne 13:23-27.
When God sent his only-begotten Son to earth he caused him to be born into a human family. He provided that he have a God-fearing adoptive father and a loving mother. Jesus as a child was subject to his parents and respected and obeyed them. (Lu 2:40, 51) Even when he was dying on the torture stake he showed respect and loving care for his mother, who was apparently then a widow, when he said to her: “Woman, see! Your son!” and to the disciple whom he loved: “See! Your mother!” thereby evidently directing this disciple to care for her in his own home.—Joh 19:26, 27.
How does the Bible indicate the importance of the family in the Christian congregation?
In the Christian congregation the family is recognized as the basic unit of Christian society. Much space is devoted in the Christian Greek Scriptures to instructions regarding family relationship. Again the man is dignified with the headship of the family, the wife being in subjection to her husband, managing the household under his general oversight. (1Co 11:3; 1Ti 2:11-15; 5:14) Likening Jesus to the husband and family head over his congregational ‘wife,’ Paul admonishes husbands to exercise headship in love, and he counsels wives to respect and subject themselves to their husbands. (Eph 5:21-33) Children are commanded to obey their parents, and fathers particularly are charged with the responsibility of bringing up the children in the discipline and mental-regulating of Jehovah.—Eph 6:1-4.
The man used as an overseer in the Christian congregation, if married, must exhibit high standards as a family head, presiding properly and having his children in subjection, these not being unruly or charged with debauchery, for, asks Paul: “If indeed any man does not know how to preside over his own household, how will he take care of God’s congregation?” the congregation being similar to a family. (1Ti 3:2-5; Tit 1:6) Wives are exhorted to love their husbands and children, to be workers at home, and to subject themselves to their own husbands.—Tit 2:4, 5.
Jesus foretold that opposition to God’s truth would split families. (Mt 10:32-37; Lu 12:51-53) But the apostle Paul strongly admonished believers against breaking up the marriage relationship, appealing on the basis of the welfare of the unbelieving mate as well as of the children. He stressed the great value of the family relationship when he pointed out that God views the young children as holy, even though the unbelieving mate has not been cleansed from his sins by faith in Christ. The unbeliever may, in fact, be practicing some of the same things that Paul says some Christians had practiced before accepting the good news about the Christ. (1Co 7:10-16; 6:9-11) The apostle also guards the unity of the Christian family by giving instructions to husbands and wives regarding the rendering of marriage dues.—1Co 7:3-5.
Association in family relationships proved to be a blessing to many in connection with Christianity, “for, wife, how do you know but that you will save your husband? Or, husband, how do you know but that you will save your wife?” (1Co 7:16) This is also evidenced by the contents of the apostle Paul’s greetings to several households. Some believers were privileged to use the family home as a place for the congregation to meet. (Ro 16:1-15) The Christian missionary Philip was a family man, having four faithful Christian daughters. He was blessed by being able to entertain the apostle Paul and his fellow workers for a time in his home in Caesarea. (Ac 21:8-10) The Christian congregation itself is termed “God’s household.” Its principal member and head is Jesus Christ, and this “household” recognizes him as the Seed by means of whom all the families of the earth will bless themselves.—1Ti 3:15; Eph 2:19; Col 1:17, 18; Ge 22:18; 28:14.
The inspired Scriptures have foretold a vicious attack on the family institution with a consequent breaking down of morality and of human society outside the Christian congregation. Paul classifies among demon-inspired doctrines in “later periods of time” that of “forbidding to marry.” He foretells for “the last days” a condition in which disobedience to parents, disloyalty, and absence of “natural affection” would be rife, even among those “having a form of godly devotion.” He warns Christians to turn away from such ones.—1Ti 4:1-3; 2Ti 3:1-5.
Babylon the Great, the enemy of God’s “woman” (Ge 3:15; Ga 4:27) and of Christ’s “bride” (Re 21:9), is a great “harlot” organization, committing fornication with the kings of the earth. Being “the mother of the harlots and of the disgusting things of the earth” indicates that her “daughters” are harlots, also that she causes great disregard for Jehovah God’s institutions and commandments, including his requirements that contribute to family integrity. (Re 17:1-6) She has made efforts to induce others to harlotry and has succeeded in producing many ‘harlot’ daughters, with attempts being made to prevent Christ from having a clean “bride.” Nevertheless, his “bride” comes through victorious, clean, righteous, worthy of being in Jehovah’s “family” as the “wife” of Jesus Christ, to the blessing and rejoicing of all the universe.—2Co 11:2, 3; Re 19:2, 6-8; see MARRIAGE and other family relationships under their respective names.

WOMAN

An adult human female, one beyond the age of puberty. The Hebrew expression for woman is ´ish·shah´ (literally, a female man), which is also rendered “wife.” Similarly, the Greek term gy·ne´ is translated both “woman” and “wife.”

Creation. Before the man Adam ever asked for a human companion, God his Creator made provision. After placing Adam in the garden of Eden and giving him the law respecting the tree of the knowledge of good and bad, Jehovah said: “It is not good for the man to continue by himself. I am going to make a helper for him, as a complement of him.” (Ge 2:18) He did not oblige the man to go seeking a companion among the animals, but he brought the animals to Adam for naming. Adam was not inclined toward bestiality and was able to determine that there was no suitable companion for him among these. (Ge 2:19, 20) “Hence Jehovah God had a deep sleep fall upon the man and, while he was sleeping, he took one of his ribs and then closed up the flesh over its place. And Jehovah God proceeded to build the rib that he had taken from the man into a woman and to bring her to the man. Then the man said: ‘This is at last bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. This one will be called Woman, because from man this one was taken.’”—Ge 2:21-23.

Position and Responsibilities. The woman, being created out of the man, was dependent upon the man for being brought into existence. Being part of the man, “one flesh” with him, and a complement and helper to him, she was subject to him as her head. She was also under the law that God had given Adam about the tree of the knowledge of good and bad. She was responsible to work for the good of the man. Together they were to have children and to exercise dominion over the animals.—Ge 1:28; 2:24.

Since the normal course for women in Bible times was to marry, the scriptures that treat of the woman’s responsibilities usually have reference to her position as a wife. The primary duty of all women in Israel was to serve Jehovah God in true worship. Abigail, who became the wife of David after her good-for-nothing husband Nabal died, was an example of this. Even though Nabal took a bad course, refusing to use his material goods to help David, the anointed of Jehovah, Abigail realized that she, as Nabal’s wife, was not obligated to follow her husband in such action contrary to Jehovah’s will. Jehovah blessed her when her assisting his anointed one showed her persistence in right worship.—1Sa 25:23-31, 39-42.

Secondarily, the woman was to obey her husband. She was responsible to work hard for the good of the household and to bring honor to her husbandly head. This would bring the greatest glory to her. Proverbs 14:1 says: “The truly wise woman has built up her house, but the foolish one tears it down with her own hands.” She should always speak well of her husband and increase the respect of others for him, and he should be able to take pride in her. “A capable wife is a crown to her owner, but as rottenness in his bones is she that acts shamefully.” (Pr 12:4) The honorable position and the privileges she has as a wife, together with the blessings to her because of faithfulness, industriousness, and wisdom, are described in Proverbs chapter 31.—See WIFE.

A Hebrew woman who was a mother had much to do with the training of her children in righteousness, respectfulness, and industriousness and often did much in counseling and influencing older sons for good. (Ge 27:5-10; Ex 2:7-10; Pr 1:8; 31:1; 2Ti 1:5; 3:14, 15) Girls, especially, were trained to be good wives by learning from their mothers the arts of cooking, weaving, and general household management, while the father taught the son a trade. Wives also were free to express themselves to their husbands (Ge 16:5, 6) and at times aided their husbands in arriving at right decisions.—Ge 21:9-13; 27:46–28:4.

The bride was usually selected for a man by the parents. But, doubtless under the Law, as it was earlier in Rebekah’s case, the girl had an opportunity to voice her feelings and will in the matter. (Ge 24:57, 58) Although polygamy was practiced, God not yet acting to restore the original state of monogamy until the Christian congregation was established (Ge 2:23, 24; Mt 19:4-6; 1Ti 3:2), polygamous relationships were regulated.

Even the military laws favored both wife and husband in exempting a newly married man for one year. This gave the couple the opportunity to exercise their right to have a child, which would be a great comfort to the mother when the husband was away, and even more so if he should die in battle.—De 20:7; 24:5.

Laws applied with equal force to both men and women who were guilty of adultery, incest, bestiality, and other crimes. (Le 18:6, 23; 20:10-12; De 22:22) Women were not to wear the clothing of a man or a man the clothing of a woman, a practice that might open the way for immorality, including homosexuality. (De 22:5) Women could participate in the benefits of the Sabbaths, the laws governing Nazirites, the festivals, and, in general, all the provisions of the Law. (Ex 20:10; Nu 6:2; De 12:18; 16:11, 14) The mother, as well as the father, was to be honored and obeyed.—Le 19:3; 20:9; De 5:16; 27:16.

Privileges in the Christian Congregation. For those called by God to the heavenly calling (Heb 3:1) to be joint heirs with Jesus Christ, there is no distinction between men and women in a spiritual sense. The apostle writes: “You are all, in fact, sons of God through your faith in Christ . . . there is neither male nor female; for you are all one person in union with Christ Jesus.” (Ga 3:26-28) These all must receive a change of nature at their resurrection, being made partakers together of “divine nature,” in which state none will be women, for there is no female sex among spirit creatures, sex being God’s means for reproduction of earthly creatures.—2Pe 1:4.

Proclaimers of the good news. Women, spoken of as “daughters” and “women slaves” in Joel’s prophecy, were among those receiving the gifts of holy spirit on the day of Pentecost 33 C.E. From that day forward the Christian women who were favored with these gifts talked in foreign tongues that they had not understood before, and they ‘prophesied,’ not necessarily making predictions of important future events, but speaking forth Bible truths.—Joe 2:28, 29; Ac 1:13-15; 2:1-4, 13-18; see PROPHETESS.

Their speaking about Bible truths to others was not to be limited to fellow believers. Before his ascension to heaven, Jesus had told his followers: “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.” (Ac 1:8) Thereafter, on the day of Pentecost 33 C.E., when holy spirit was poured out upon them, the entire group of some 120 disciples (including some women) were empowered as his witnesses (Ac 1:14, 15; 2:3, 4); and the prophecy of Joel (2:28, 29) quoted by Peter on that occasion included reference to such women. So they were numbered among those who bore the responsibility to be witnesses of Jesus “in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the most distant part of the earth.” Consistent with that, the apostle Paul later reported that Euodia and Syntyche, in Philippi, had “striven side by side with [him] in the good news”; and Luke mentioned Priscilla as sharing with her husband Aquila in ‘expounding the way of God’ in Ephesus.—Php 4:2, 3; Ac 18:26.

Congregational meetings. There were meetings when these women could pray or prophesy, provided they wore a head covering. (1Co 11:3-16; see HEAD COVERING.) However, at what were evidently public meetings, when “the whole congregation” as well as “unbelievers” assembled in one place (1Co 14:23-25), women were to “keep silent.” If ‘they wanted to learn something, they could question their own husbands at home, for it was disgraceful for a woman to speak in a congregation.’—1Co 14:31-35.

While not permitted to teach in congregational assembly, a woman could teach persons outside the congregation who desired to learn the truth of the Bible and the good news about Jesus Christ (compare Ps 68:11), as well as be a ‘teacher of what is good’ to younger women (and children) within the congregation. (Tit 2:3-5) But she was not to exercise authority over a man or dispute with men, as, for example, in the meetings of the congregation. She was to remember what happened to Eve and how God expressed the matter of woman’s position after Adam and Eve had sinned.—1Ti 2:11-14; Ge 3:16.

Men serve as overseers, ministerial servants. In the discussion of “gifts in men” given by Christ to the congregation, there is no mention of women. The words “apostles,” “prophets,” “evangelizers,” “shepherds,” and “teachers” are all in the masculine gender. (Eph 4:8, 11) Ephesians 4:11 is rendered by the American Translation: “And he has given us some men as apostles, some as prophets, some as missionaries, some as pastors and teachers.”—Compare Mo, NW; also Ps 68:18.

In full accord with this, when the apostle Paul wrote to Timothy about the qualifications for the service positions of “overseers” (e·pi´sko·poi), who were also “older men” (pre·sby´te·roi), and of “ministerial servants” (di·a´ko·noi) in the congregation, he specifically states that they must be men and, if married, ‘the husband of one wife.’ No discussion by any of the apostles discusses any office of “deaconess” (di·a·ko´nis·sa).—1Ti 3:1-13; Tit 1:5-9; compare Ac 20:17, 28; Php 1:1.

Although Phoebe is mentioned (Ro 16:1) as a “minister” (di·a´ko·nos, without the Greek definite article), it is evident that she was not an appointed female ministerial servant in the congregation, because the Scriptures make no provision for such. The apostle did not tell the congregation to receive instructions from her but, rather, to receive her well and to ‘assist her in any matter where she might need them.’ (Ro 16:2) Paul’s reference to her as a minister evidently has something to do with her activity in the spreading of the good news, and he was speaking of Phoebe as a female minister who was associated with the congregation in Cenchreae.—Compare Ac 2:17, 18.

In the home. The woman is described in the Scriptures as “a weaker vessel, the feminine one.” She is to be treated accordingly by her husband. (1Pe 3:7) She has many privileges, such as sharing in teaching the children and generally managing the internal affairs of the household, under her husband’s approval and direction. (1Ti 5:14; 1Pe 3:1, 2; Pr 1:8; 6:20; chap 31) She has the duty of submission to her husband. (Eph 5:22-24) She owes him the marital due.—1Co 7:3-5.

Adornment. The Bible throughout does not condemn adornment in clothing or the wearing of jewelry, but it commands that modesty and propriety be the governing factors. The apostle instructs that feminine dress be well arranged and that women adorn themselves “with modesty and soundness of mind.” Emphasis should not be put on hairstyles, ornaments, and expensive clothing but, rather, on the things contributing to spiritual beauty, namely, “good works” and “the secret person of the heart in the incorruptible apparel of the quiet and mild spirit.”—1Ti 2:9, 10; 1Pe 3:3, 4; compare Pr 11:16, 22; 31:30.

The apostle Peter tells such submissive women who display chaste, respectful, godly conduct that “you have become [Sarah’s] children, provided you keep on doing good and not fearing any cause for terror.” So these wives have a grand opportunity, not by being descended from faithful Sarah in a fleshly way but by imitating her. Sarah was privileged to bear Isaac and become an ancestress of Jesus Christ, who is primarily the ‘seed of Abraham.’ (Ga 3:16) Thus Christian wives, proving themselves to be figurative daughters of Sarah even toward unbelieving husbands, are sure to receive a rich reward at God’s hands.—1Pe 3:6; Ge 18:11, 12; 1Co 7:12-16.

Women Ministered to Jesus. Women enjoyed privileges in connection with Jesus’ earthly ministry, but not the privileges given to the 12 apostles and the 70 evangelizers. (Mt 10:1-8; Lu 10:1-7) A number of women ministered to Jesus from their belongings. (Lu 8:1-3) One anointed him a few days before his death, and for her act Jesus promised: “Wherever this good news is preached in all the world, what this woman did shall also be told as a remembrance of her.” (Mt 26:6-13; Joh 12:1-8) Women were among those to whom Jesus especially appeared on the day of his resurrection, and women were among those to whom he appeared later.—Mt 28:1-10; Joh 20:1-18.

Figurative Use. In several instances women are used symbolically to represent congregations or organizations of people. They also are employed to symbolize cities. Christ’s glorified congregation is spoken of as his “bride,” also called “the holy city, New Jerusalem.”—Joh 3:29; Re 21:2, 9; 19:7; compare Eph 5:23-27; Mt 9:15; Mr 2:20; Lu 5:34, 35.

Jehovah spoke to the congregation or nation of Israel as his “woman,” he being as “a husbandly owner” to her by reason of the Law covenant relationship between them. In restoration prophecies he speaks to Israel in this way, sometimes directing his words to Jerusalem, the governing city of the nation. The “sons” and “daughters” (Isa 43:5-7) of this woman were the members of the nation of Israel.—Isa 51:17-23; 52:1, 2; 54:1, 5, 6, 11-13; 66:10-12; Jer 3:14; 31:31, 32.

In many instances other nations or cities are referred to as feminine or as women. A few are: Moab (Jer 48:41), Egypt (Jer 46:11), Rabbah of Ammon (Jer 49:2), Babylon (Jer 51:13), and symbolic Babylon the Great.—Re 17:1-6; see BABYLON THE GREAT; DAUGHTER.

The “woman” of Genesis 3:15. At the time that he sentenced humankind’s parents, Adam and Eve, God gave the promise of a seed that would be brought forth by the “woman,” and who would crush the serpent’s head. (Ge 3:15) Here was a “sacred secret” that God purposed to reveal in his due time. (Col 1:26) Some factors in the circumstances existing at the time of the prophetic promise provide clues as to the ‘woman’s’ identity. Since her seed was to crush the serpent’s head, he would have to be more than a human seed, for the Scriptures show that it was not to a literal snake on the ground that God’s words were aimed. The “serpent” is shown at Revelation 12:9 to be Satan the Devil, a spirit person. Consequently, the “woman” of the prophecy could not be a human woman, such as Mary the mother of Jesus. The apostle sheds light on the matter at Galatians 4:21-31.—See SEED.

In this passage the apostle speaks of Abraham’s free wife and of his concubine Hagar and says that Hagar corresponds to the literal city of Jerusalem under the Law covenant, her “children” being the citizens of the Jewish nation. Abraham’s wife Sarah, Paul says, corresponds to “the Jerusalem above,” who is the spiritual mother of Paul and his spirit-begotten associates. This heavenly “mother” would be also the “mother” of Christ, who is the oldest among his spiritual brothers, all of whom spring from God as their Father.—Heb 2:11, 12; see FREE WOMAN.

It would follow logically and in harmony with the Scriptures that the “woman” of Genesis 3:15 would be a spiritual “woman.” And corresponding to the fact that the “bride,” or “wife,” of Christ is not an individual woman, but a composite one, made of many spiritual members (Re 21:9), the “woman” who brings forth God’s spiritual sons, God’s ‘wife’ (prophetically foretold in the words of Isaiah and Jeremiah as cited in the foregoing), would be made up of many spiritual persons. It would be a composite body of persons, an organization, a heavenly one.

This “woman” is described in John’s vision, in Revelation chapter 12. She is shown as bringing forth a son, a ruler who is to “shepherd all the nations with an iron rod.” (Compare Ps 2:6-9; 110:1, 2.) This vision was given to John long after Jesus’ human birth and also after his anointing as God’s Messiah. Since it obviously has to do with the same person, it must have reference, not to Jesus’ human birth, but to some other event, namely, his being installed in Kingdom power. So the birth of God’s Messianic Kingdom was here pictured.

Satan is shown later as persecuting the “woman” and making war with “the remaining ones of her seed.” (Re 12:13, 17) The “woman” being heavenly, and Satan by this time being hurled down to the earth (Re 12:7-9), he could not reach those heavenly persons of whom the “woman” was made up, but he could reach the remaining ones of her “seed,” her children, the brothers of Jesus Christ still on earth. In that way he persecuted the “woman.”

Other uses. In foretelling famine conditions to come upon Israel if they disobeyed and broke his covenant, God said: “Ten women will then actually bake your bread in but one oven and give back your bread by weight.” The famine would be so great that ten women would need only one oven, whereas they would each use one in normal times.—Le 26:26.

After warning Israel of the calamities that would come upon her for unfaithfulness, Jehovah said, through Isaiah the prophet: “And seven women will actually grab hold of one man in that day, saying: ‘We shall eat our own bread and wear our own mantles; only may we be called by your name to take away our reproach.’” (Isa 4:1) In the preceding two verses (Isa 3:25, 26), God had pointed out that Israel’s men would fall by war. So he was telling Israel of the inroads such conditions would make on the manpower of the nation, creating such a shortage that several women would attach themselves to one man. They would be glad to take his name and have some male attentions, even if they had to share him with other women. They would accept polygamy or concubinage to have some little part in a man’s life. Thereby some of the reproach of widowhood or of the unmarried state, and childlessness, would be removed.

In a prophecy comforting Israel, Jehovah said: “How long will you turn this way and that, O unfaithful daughter? For Jehovah has created a new thing in the earth: A mere female will press around an able-bodied man.” (“The woman woos the man!” AT) (Jer 31:22) Up until then Israel, with whom God was in the relationship of marriage by reason of the Law covenant, was turning “this way and that” in unfaithfulness. Now Jehovah invites the “virgin of Israel” to set up road marks and signposts to guide her back and to fix her heart upon the highway that leads back. (Jer 31:21) Jehovah will put his spirit in her so that she will be most eager to come back. Thus, as a wife would press around her husband in order to get back into good relations with him, so Israel would press around Jehovah God in order to get back into good relations with him as her husband.

“The desire of women.” Of “the king of the north,” Daniel’s prophecy says: “To the god of his fathers he will give no consideration; and to the desire of women and to every other god he will give no consideration, but over everyone he will magnify himself. But to the god of fortresses, in his position he will give glory.” (Da 11:37, 38) “Women” here may represent the weaker nations who become ‘handmaids’ of “the king of the north,” as weaker vessels. They have their gods that they desire and worship, but the “king of the north” disregards them and pays homage to a god of militarism.

The symbolic “locusts.” In the vision of the symbolic “locusts” at Revelation 9:1-11, these locusts are depicted as having “hair as women’s hair.” In harmony with the Scriptural principle that the woman’s long hair is a sign of her subjection to her husbandly head, the hair of these symbolic “locusts” must represent the subjection of those whom they symbolize to the one who is shown in the prophecy to be head and king over them.—See ABADDON.

144,000 ‘not defiled with women.’ In Revelation 14:1-4, the 144,000 described as standing with the Lamb on Mount Zion are said to have been “bought from the earth. These are the ones that did not defile themselves with women; in fact, they are virgins.” These are shown as having a more intimate relationship with the Lamb than any others do, being the only ones to master the “new song.” (Re 14:1-4) This would indicate that they make up the “bride” of the Lamb. (Re 21:9) They are spiritual persons, as revealed by the fact that they stand on the heavenly Mount Zion with the Lamb. Therefore their ‘not defiling themselves with women’ and their being “virgins” would not mean that none of these 144,000 persons had ever been married, for the Scriptures do not forbid persons on earth who are to be joint heirs with Christ to marry. (1Ti 3:2; 4:1, 3) Neither would it imply that all the 144,000 were men, for “there is neither male nor female” as far as the spiritual relationship of Christ’s joint heirs is concerned. (Ga 3:28) The “women” therefore must be symbolic women, doubtless religious organizations such as Babylon the Great and her ‘daughters,’ false religious organizations, the joining of and participation in which would prevent one from being spotless. (Re 17:5) This symbolic description harmonizes with the requirement in the Law that the high priest of Israel take only a virgin for his wife, for Jesus Christ is Jehovah’s great High Priest.—Le 21:10, 14; 2Co 11:2; Heb 7:26.

With reference to Jesus’ addressing Mary as “woman,” see MARY No. 1 (Respected, Loved by Jesus).